Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 58017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
2026/KER/66899, 2026:KER:66899
CRL.MC NO. 4905 OF 2022
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
ALI NARIKUNNEN
AGED 54 YEARS
NARIKUNNAN VEETTIL, PERINTHATTIRI, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676507
BY ADVS.
SHRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
SMT.BINCY JOB
RESPONDENTS/STATE & DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
2 MOHANAN
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O. VELAYUDHAN, KOLLAMPURATHU VEEDU, THENKARA P.O., MANNARKADU VILLAGE, MANNARKADU TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678582
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 / 11TH BHADRA, 1948
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
dkr
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 4905 OF 2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS EXHIBITED IN DAILY STATUS OF E-COURT SERVICES FROM THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE MANNARKADU.
Annexure-2 THE BOOKING DETAILS OF THE AUDITORIUM FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE MARRIAGE CEREMONY.
CRL.MC NO. 4905 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.18 OF 2018 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, MANNARKAD
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.09.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
C.S.DIAS, J.
Crl.M.C.No. 4905 of 2022
Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2026
O R D E R
The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to recall the non-bailable warrant issued against the petitioner in C.C.No.18 of 2018 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mannarkkad ('Trial Court', for brevity), on the assertion that the petitioner was unaware of the posting date and the marriage ceremony of his children was scheduled to be held on 25.07.2022.
2. When this petition came up for consideration on 22.07.2022, this Court directed the non-bailable warrant issued against the petitioner to be kept in abeyance for a period of one week.
3. Heard. Taking into consideration the relief that was prayed for in this petition and the interim order that was passed,
I am of the view that this petition has outlived its purpose. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed, but by reserving the right of the petitioner to raise all his contentions before the Trial Court.
