Click the Play button to listen to article

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday (September 29) dismissed the transfer petition filed by the accused persons in the Shuhaib murder case seeking to transfer the trial from Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery to another competent court. [2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 534]

A detailed order is awaited.

Youth Congress activist Shuhaib was hacked to death allegedly by CPI(M) workers in Mattanur in Kannur district on February 12, 2018. As per the case, there were 29 grievous injuries on him. 

Justice C.S. Dias today observed in open court:

"Learned Sessions Judge shall ensure that both parties are afforded full and effective opportunity to participate in the trial including by suo motu reopening the evidence and permitting the counsel for the accused to cross-examine the witnesses. The counsel for the accused persons are expected to cooperate with the court and avoid unnecessary interruptions or adjournments. Considering that the case is of the year 2018 and given the number of witnesses cited, trial shall be conducted with due expedition. Learned Sessions Court is directed to dispose of the case untrammeled by any observations in this order. The above transfer petition is dismissed."

The accused had sought to transfer the trial alleging that there is a reasonable apprehension that they may not receive a fair and impartial trial.

Before approaching the High Court, the accused had moved the Sessions Court, Thalassery, seeking transfer of the trial. Their first application was dismissed on technical grounds for want of an affidavit, while a second application filed with an affidavit was rejected on merits on June 6, 2026.

The petitioners had stated that when one of the witnesses was examined, the petitioners/accused requested the trial judge to note the demeanour of the witness in order to prove that the witness was tutored. They contended that the witness had adduced evidence like recording a statement under Section 164 CrPC. After the trial court rejected the request, the accused challenged the order before the High Court and subsequently sought transfer of the case.

According to the petitioners, the trial court later dismissed an application concerning the recording of evidence and cautioned against filing similar petitions in future.The defence counsel then requested time to challenge the afore order and later, they moved the High Court in Crl.M.C. No. 4292/2026.

The accused had also stated that, despite their regular appearance before court and without any deliberate attempt to delay proceedings, the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery cancelled the bail bonds of the accused on May 25, 2026 and remanded them to custody, after hearing that a transfer petition had been filed before the Principal Sessions Court. The petitioners contend that even though the Principal Sessions Judge reportedly noted certain haste in the conduct of proceedings, the request for transfer was ultimately declined.

The petitioners further submitted that certain remarks were made by the Presiding Officer in open court concerning the advocates for defence and in general which has substantially contributed to the loss of confidence experienced by both the accused and their counsel.

However, the Court went on to deny their plea for transferring the trial.

Case Nos: Tr.P(Crl.) 38/ 2026 and Crl.M.C. No. 4292/2026

Case Title: Akash M.V and Ors. v. State of Kerala

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 534

Counsel for petitioners: S. Rajeev, M.S Aneer, Anilkumar C.R, K.S. Kiran Krishnan, Sarath K.P, Akash Cherian Thomas, Azad Sunil, T.P Aravind, Maheswar Padickal, Akshara S, Dipa V

Tags: