ACHARAPARAMBATH PRADEEPAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA
LAWS(SC)-2006-12-61
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on December 15,2006

ACHARAPARAMBATH PRADEEPAN Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

TITU VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-399] [REFERRED TO]
HASEENA AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
ISHAN DEB BARMA VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(GAU)-2008-12-27] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2012-3-24] [REFERRED TO]
SH. RAJESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2012-3-481] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH PEHLWAN VS. STATE OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2012-11-15] [REFERRED TO]
ATENDER YADAV VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2013-10-303] [REFERRED TO]
S V RAMAKRISHNAN VS. P R SETHURAMAN [LAWS(MAD)-2011-9-338] [REFERRED TO]
NARINDER KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-9-89] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2022-5-103] [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDRA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-8-137] [REFERRED TO]
PANKAJ SHARMA VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR [LAWS(J&K)-2024-2-4] [REFERRED TO]
MADAN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2023-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
NEERAJ ALIAS TIKIYA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2009-2-72] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. VIKAS ALIAS BILLU [LAWS(HPH)-2010-10-11] [REFERRED TO]
G.PRABHAKAR VS. G.VENKATRAMAN [LAWS(MAD)-2022-11-138] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVIN DHONDIRAM CHORGE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-1-259] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF M P VS. SETAARAM [LAWS(CHH)-2009-6-10] [REFERRED TO]
JASEER M. K. VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2021-4-22] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV NANDAN SAHAY SRIVASTAVA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2010-7-186] [REFERRED TO]
GAURI SHANKAR VS. STATE [LAWS(RAJ)-2010-3-30] [REFERRED TO]
RAMU @ JITENDRA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-10-132] [REFERRED TO]
SHISHIR KUMAR @ CHUNNU VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-5-386] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH UMANATH SHETTY VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-10-88] [REFERRED TO]
LAVGHANBHAI DEVJIBHAI VASAVA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2015-9-45] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI SILASH SINGH @ KURID VS. STATE [LAWS(CAL)-2017-12-222] [REFERRED TO]
MASITULLA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-10-134] [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. SHYAM SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2019-8-385] [REFERRED TO]
SAT PARKASH YADAV VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2014-5-276] [REFERRED TO]
GAMA ALIAS MD ANWAR VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2010-12-10] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHAND VS. STATE OF J & K [LAWS(J&K)-2021-7-40] [REFERRED TO]
SIVALAL VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-7-146] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF SIKKIM VS. GIRJAMAN RAI @ KAMI, SON OF DHAN BAHADUR RAI [LAWS(SIK)-2019-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. DHRUV CHANDRA KURMI [LAWS(ALL)-2011-9-185] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVIN DHONDIRAM CHORGE VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2017-1-34] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. RAFIQ VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2009-3-111] [REFERRED TO]
RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-12-45] [REFERRED TO]
PREMPAL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-9-53] [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK SINGH @ MINTU SINGH (PINTU) VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2016-5-376] [REFERRED]
STATE OF HP VS. SATPAL [LAWS(HPH)-2010-9-281] [REFERRED TO]
GIREESAN NAIR VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(SC)-2022-11-53] [REFERRED TO]
STATE AND ORS. VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2007-4-258] [REFERRED TO]
State of H.P. VS. Ram Lal [LAWS(HPH)-2009-3-39] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P (STATE APPEAL) VS. VIJAI KUMAR KORI [LAWS(ALL)-2016-5-305] [REFERRED]
RAJENDRA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-229] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHANPAL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-3-248] [REFERRED TO]
BIREN BHUMIJ VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2008-5-75] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. ASHWANI KUMAR [LAWS(HPH)-2012-8-208] [REFERRED TO]
RAM SHAKAL @ PAPPU VS. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2015-1-128] [REFERRED TO]
JARNAIL SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-2009-8-50] [REFERRED TO]
RAVI ALIAS RAVICHANDRAN VS. STATE [LAWS(SC)-2007-4-143] [REFERRED TO]
SWAMY SHRADDANANDA ALIAS MURALI MANOHAR MISHRA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2007-5-162] [REFERRED TO]
ONKAR PATEL @ OMKAR VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2020-8-359] [REFERRED TO]
BABLOO VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2009-2-81] [REFERRED TO]
RAJESH YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(SC)-2022-2-29] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(SC)-2007-4-34] [REFERRED TO]
RAM JIWAN CHOUDHARY ALIAS MITO CHOUDHARY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2011-1-226] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF H P VS. RAJ KUMAR ALIAS RAJU [LAWS(HPH)-2008-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWANI KUMAR VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2015-10-79] [REFERRED TO]
SHAIKH SHAHBAJ VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2024-2-60] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P (STATE APPEAL) VS. ILYAS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-4-269] [REFERRED]
VIRENDRA BAGHEL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-7-32] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

S. B. Sinha, J. - (1.)A ghastly murder in Mokeri East U.P. School, Paramel, Kannur Distt., Kerala took place on 1.12.1999 at about 10.40 a.m. K.P. Jayakrishnan Master (deceased) was a teacher in the said school. He was the class teacher of class VI B. The school did not have a proper building. It was a semi- permanent shed. Whereas two sides of it had pucca walls with a height of about seven feet, the western and eastern walls were having kutcha ones. It had three classrooms, viz., for students of classes VA, VI B and VII B. In the northern room, class VIIB was to be held whereas class VIB was situate in the middle room and to its south was the class room of VA. On its eastern side, there was only 70 cm. wall having about 2 feet height. Another building was separated by 2.5 metres wide pathway. Classes VIB and VA were separated only by a screen.
(2.)The deceased was the State Vice President of Bhartiya Yuva Morcha. Appellants were members of the Communist Party of India (Marxist Group). Political enmity between the two parties is not in dispute. There had been a threatening to the life of the deceased. He had been provided with personal security. At the time of incidence, the bodyguard of the deceased was sitting at the gate of the school. He was overpowered by pouring some poisonous liquids in his eyes and mouth and his service pistol was taken away to prevent any possible obstruction that he may cause. He was, thus, made immobile.
(3.)There was a house by the side of the said school building belonging to a teacher named Prabhavathy.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.