Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013 28TH SRAVANA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 3732 of 2012 () --------------------------- CC NO.494/2008 (REFILED AS CC NO.476/2011) OF THE JFCM, ERATTUPETTA PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED: ---------------------- THAHA, AGED 3 YEARS S/O.KUNJUVAIDEEN, VELLIYATHU HOUSE ERATTUPETTA VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK. BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S)/STATE: -------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM-682 031 (CRIME NO.218/2008 OF ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT) (CC.NO.494/2008 JFCM, ERATTUPETTA) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-08-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.MC.No. 3732 of 2012 () --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'(S) ANNEXURES: ANNEX.I COPY OF THE CHARGE LAID BY THE POLICE. ANNEX.II COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29 12.2011 IN CC NO.494/08 (RENUMBERED AS CC NO.476/2011). RESPONDENT'(S) ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE BKA V.K. MOHANAN, J.
-------------------------------------------------- Crl. M.C. No. 3732 of 2012 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of August, 2013 ORDER
The petitioner is the 3rd accused in Crime No.218/2008 of Erattupetta Police Station. According to the petitioner, the other accused in the very same crime faced prosecution in CC No.494/2008 and as per Annexure-II judgment, the learned Magistrate acquitted them. Thus, according to the petitioner, he is also entitled to get the benefit of the said judgment. Hence, the present Crl.M.C. is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash all further proceedings in CC No.494/2008 (refiled as CC No.476/2011) pending against him before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Erattupetta.
2. I have heard Sri. S. Rajeev, the learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard the learned Public Prosecutor. Crl. M.C. No. 3732 of 2012 ..2..
3. The prosecution case is that on 04.06.2008 at 9p.m., the accused persons after forming an unlawful assembly in furtherance of their common object attacked CW1 to 5 when they reached at the waste dumping ground with waste in a tractor. The accused persons destroyed the tractor, which is belonged to Erattupetta Grama Panchayath and thereby caused a loss of 1,00,000/- to the Panchayath. They did the aforesaid acts with deadly weapons with them. Thus, according to the prosecution, the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 447, 427 r/w Section 149 of I.P.C. and also committed the offences punishable under Section 3 of PDPP Act.
4. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I have carefully gone through Annexure-II judgment in CC No.494/2008 of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Erattupetta. In paragraph 6 of the above judgment, the learned Magistrate, who undertook the trial, has found that when Crl. M.C. No. 3732 of 2012 ..3.. PW1 was examined, though he was one of the victim of the attack allegedly made by the accused, deposed that he does not know the person, who attacked them and destroyed the vehicle. According to PW1, a number of persons crowded and attacked them, and accordingly, PW1 was declared hostile and though the learned Additional Public Prosecutor had cross-examined him, nothing was brought against the accused. The learned Magistrate further found that PWs 2 to 5 were also turned hostile to the prosecution, who deposed that they do not know the persons who destroyed the vehicle and attacked them. They also deposed that a number of persons crowded and attacked them. PWs 6 and 7 are respectively the President and Secretary of Erattupetta Panchayath on the alleged date of the incident, who have no direct knowledge about the incident.
5. Under the above facts and circumstances, having considered the evidence on record, particularly, the deposition of PWs 1 to 5, the learned Magistrate has Crl. M.C. No. 3732 of 2012 ..4.. found that absolutely, there was no evidence before that court to prove the accused has done the offences as alleged. Therefore, I find no reason to direct the petitioner to face the prosecution. In spite of the evidence already recorded in the previous trial, in the event of the petitioner proceeded with the trial, there would not have any fruitful prosecution resulting the conviction of the accused, rather the net result would be sheer waste of judicial time and abuse of process of the court and proceedings. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of quashing all further proceedings in LP No.21/2012 (CC No.476/2011) pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Erattupetta. Sd/- V.K. MOHANAN, JUDGE bka/-