K M ASOKAN NAMBIAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What is the effect of a trial held by a Court of Sessions consequent to cognizance taken in breach of the stipulations of S.193 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Does such breach ipso facto vitiate the trial Is there any conflict between the two decisions of the Supreme Court reported in Vidyadharan v. State of Kerala ( 2004 (1) KLT 105 ) and State of M.P. v. Bhooraji (2001 (3) KLT (SC) (SN) 47 P.34 : ( 2001 (7) SCC 679 ) These questions of contextual relevance are raised in this appeal.

(2.) The prosecution alleged that the petitioner had committed the offence punishable under S.323 of the Indian Penal Code and S.3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act'). The final report was submitted by the police before the Special Court notified under S.14 of the SC/ST P.A. Act.

(3.) Cognizance was taken by the Sessions Court without insisting on committal of the case, obviously on the basis of a decision of the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court reported in Hareendran v. Sarada ( 1995 (1) KLT 231 ). The accused denied the offence alleged against him. Thereupon, PWs. 1 to 10 were examined and Exts.P1 to P11 were marked. The accused took up a defence of total denial. He contended that PWs.5 to 7 were not speaking the truth. They were close friends and interested. PW.5 has a motive against the accused. In these circumstances, it was contended that the accused is entitled for an acquittal. No defence evidence was adduced,