Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S. Dias, J
Roji Augustine – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 7039 OF 2026|CRIME NO.594/2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Sreekumar, Vishak K. Johnson
For the Respondents: T. Asaf Ali, Dalbi Emmanuel P
The High Court will not exercise its inherent powers to stay trial proceedings if the petitioner has failed to exhaust the alternative remedy of applying for such relief before the Trial Court.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure - Stay of Proceedings - Alternative Remedy - A petitioner seeking to stay trial proceedings pending another investigation must first approach the Trial Court; failure to exhaust available alternative remedies precludes the exercise of inherent powers by the High Court. (Para 3)
Issues: Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers to stay trial proceedings when the petitioner has not first approached the Trial Court for the same relief.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. request for stay of trial proceedings due to intertwined investigations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. requirement to exhaust alternative remedies before invoking inherent powers. (Para 3) |
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 14.08.2026 IN CC NO.456 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHOTTANIKKARA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.08.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Dated this the 20th day of August, 2026
The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to stay all further proceedings in C.C.No.456/2022 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chottanikkara, until the investigation in OR No.01/2021 registered by the Meppadi Forest Range Office, is completed because both the cases are intrinsically intertwined. If the Trial Court proceeds with the trial in C.C.No.456/2022, it will lead to contradictory findings and cause severe miscarriage of justice to the petitioner.
2. Heard, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Director General of Prosecution.
3. Indisputably, the petitioner has not filed any application before the Trial Court for the above relief. It is without resorting to the said alternative remedy that the petitioner has filed this petition. It was for the petitioner to have first moved an application before the Trial Court for the above relief, instead of rushing to this Court. Hence, I am not inclined to exercise the inherent powers of this Couirt.
In the aforesaid circumstances, this Crl.M.C is dismissed, but by reserving the right of the petitioner to work out his remedies in accordance with law.
