GEORGEKUTTY Y. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ext.P6 order dated 09.06.2014 in W.P.(C) No.9626 of 2015, issued by the Government of Kerala, which is subsequently corrected through order dated 12.11.2014, is under challenge in these writ petitions. W.P.(C) No.9626 of 2015 is treated as the main case. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.9626/2015 is the de facto complainant/injured in C.C.No.130/1988 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Neyyattinkara.

(2.) The 2nd respondent in W.P.(C) No.9626/2015, who was the accused in C.C.No.130/1988 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Neyyattinkara, for the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC, was convicted by the said court. A sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of 1,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three more months, was imposed, through Ext.P1 judgment produced in W.P.(C) No.9626/2015. Challenging the conviction and sentence, the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.43 of 1990 before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The 1st Additional Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, to which it was made over, dismissed the same through Ext.P2, thereby confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trial court. Challenging the appellate judgment, the 2nd respondent herein preferred Crl.R.P. No.821 of 1991 before this Court. Vide Ext.P3 judgment, this Court confirmed the conviction and the substantive sentence of imprisonment for two years imposed by the trial court, which was confirmed by the appellate court. This Court has set aside the sentence of fine and the consequent default sentence.

(3.) Thereafter, for 17 years, the 2nd respondent kept mum and was roaming around. After 17 years, SLP No.10048/2011 was preferred by the 2nd respondent before the Apex Court. The said SLP was dismissed. Thereafter, he preferred a Review Petition before the Apex Court and the same was dismissed through Ext.P4 order dated 04.10.2012. While dismissing the Review Petition, the Apex Court has made the following observations: "In the entire Review Petition, the petitioner has not expressed any desire to surrender even now. In the circumstances, no ground is made out for review of the said order".