The Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by the accused in the Shuhaib murder case seeking to transfer the trial from the Additional Sessions Judge-III Court in Thalassery to another competent court.

Justice C S Dias, while dismissing the petition, directed the Sessions Court to ensure that both the prosecution and defence are given a full and effective opportunity to participate in the proceedings. The court also said the Sessions Court could, if necessary, suo motu reopen the evidence and permit the defence counsel to cross-examine witnesses.

The High Court further directed the trial court to proceed with the case expeditiously, noting that the matter dates back to 2018 and involves a large number of witnesses. It also made it clear that the trial court should dispose of the case without being influenced by any observations made in the High Court's order.

Youth Congress activist Shuhaib was hacked to death allegedly by CPM workers at Mattanur in Kannur district on February 12, 2018. He had suffered 29 grievous injuries, according to the case.

The accused had earlier approached the Thalassery Sessions Court seeking transfer of the trial. Their first application was dismissed on technical grounds as it was not accompanied by an affidavit. A second application, filed with an affidavit, was dismissed on merits on June 6, 2026.

The accused told the High Court that, during the examination of one of the witnesses, they had sought a direction to the trial court to record the witness's demeanour, arguing that this could help establish that the witness had been tutored. They also claimed that the witness's testimony was similar to the statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC.

After the trial court rejected the request, the accused challenged the order before the High Court and subsequently sought the transfer of the trial.

The petitioners further submitted that the trial court later dismissed an application relating to the recording of evidence and cautioned them against filing similar petitions in the future.

The defence counsel then sought time to challenge the order, following which the accused approached the High Court.

The accused also claimed that the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Thalassery, cancelled their bail bonds on May 25, 2026, and remanded them to custody after learning that they had filed a transfer petition before the Principal Sessions Court. They maintained that they had been regularly appearing before the trial court and had made no deliberate attempt to delay the proceedings.

The petitioners further contended that although the Principal Sessions Judge had reportedly observed some haste in the conduct of the proceedings, the request to transfer the case was ultimately rejected.

They also alleged that remarks made by the Presiding Officer in open court about the defence advocates, as well as general observations, had substantially contributed to the loss of confidence among the accused and their counsel.

The High Court, however, declined to transfer the trial and directed the Sessions Court to proceed with the case while ensuring that the defence is given an effective opportunity to participate in the proceedings.
(With LiveLaw inputs)