Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 59259
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S. Dias, J
P.N Sathyanarayanan – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 10551 OF 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Renjith B. Marar, Lakshmi N. Kaimal, Keshavraj Nair, P. Rajkumar, Arun Poomulli, Preetha S Chandran, Abhijith Sreekumar, Anand Remesh, Abhiram S., C.R. Rekha, T.K. Babu, R. Rohit
For the Respondents: K. Mohanakannan, H. Praveen (Kottarakara), Devadas H Mallan
A petition to accept additional evidence at the appellate stage is dismissed as redundant if the main appeal has already been dismissed and challenged in a revision petition, provided the right to raise such contentions in the revision is reserved.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure - Additional Evidence - Application to accept additional evidence at appellate stage - Where the main appeal has already been dismissed and challenged via a Criminal Revision Petition, the miscellaneous petition to accept additional evidence becomes redundant and outlives its purpose. (Para 3, 4)
Issues: Whether the petition to accept additional evidence should be entertained after the dismissal of the main appeal.
CRL.MC NO. 10551 OF 2023
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 17.10.2023 IN CRMP
5094/2022 IN Crl.A NO.89 OF 2022 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS
COURT / RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY, THALASSERY
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.09.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Dated this the 9th day of September, 2026
This petition is filed to set aside Annexure A9 order passed by the Court of Session, Thalassery, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner to accept additional evidence at the appellate stage.
Heard.
It is an undisputed fact that, during the pendency of this petition, the appeal itself has been dismissed and the petitioner has challenged the judgment before this Court in Crl.R.P. No.1381/2024, which is pending consideration.
In light of the subsequent events that have transpired, I am of the view that this petition has outlived its purpose. Therefore, this petition is only to be dismissed, but by reserving the right of the petitioner to raise the above contentions in the Crl. Revision Petition.
With the above observations, the Crl.M.C is dismissed.
