Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 5273 OF 2020 CRIME NO.278/2012 OF Town East Police Station, Thrissur AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 149/2020 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,THRISSUR PETITIONER/8TH ACCUSED: SASIKUMAR AGED 53 YEARS S/O.V ASU, KONIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERINGANDOOR, THRISSUR 680 581 BY ADVS. K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON SRI.ARUN AJAY SHANKAR SRI.JIKKU SEBAN GEORGE RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE: 1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF PLICE TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR - 680 001 2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031 BY ADV. SMT.SREEJA V., PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of December, 2023
ORDER
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity).
2. Petitioner is the 8th accused in Crime
No.278/2012 of Town East Police Station, Thrissur which is now pending as C.C.No.149/2020 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur.
3. It is submitted that the co-accused were
already acquitted as per Annexure C judgment. It is submitted that, in the light of the same, the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner is an abuse of process of court.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public
Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused were already acquitted by the trial court and the continuation of the trial against the petitioner will be an abuse of process of court because the substratum of the prosecution case is shattered. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has to face trial before the lower court and this court may not invoke the powers under Section 482 of the Code.
5. This Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of
Police (2006 (1) KLT 552), Abbas T.K. v. State of Kerala (2013 KHC 336) and in Ashraf Kancheriyil v. State of Kerala (2011(2) KHC 812) considered the powers of this court to invoke Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings based on the acquittal of co-accused. The dictum laid down by this court in the above judgment is that, if substratum of prosecution case is shattered by the judgment of acquittal of the co-accused that could be taken into account while considering the request to quash the proceedings. After going through the judgment of the trial court, I am of the considered opinion that the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner/s will be an abuse of process of court. It will be beneficial to extract the relevant portion of Annexure C
judgment by which the co-accused is acquitted:
“6. Points 1 to 6:- For the sake of convenience and brevity these points are discussed together. PW1 is the defacto complainant and Exhibit P1 is the private complaint filed by him before Chief Judicial Magistrate which was forwarded to Police u/s 156(3) Cr PC. The Police conducted investigation and filed charge sheet as per Exhibit P1. Even though there are allegations in the complaint as alleged by the prosecution, PWI turned hostile to the prosecution
stating that he has received products for `20,000/- deposited by him and no amount is due. He further stated that the matter is settled and Exhibit P1 complaint was filed on a misunderstanding. In such circumstances, examination of the remaining witnesses given up by the learned Prosecutor. As there is no incriminating evidence against the accused questioning u/s 313(1) (b) Cr PC dispensed with. The prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the accused as alleged and therefore, I find them not guilty for the offences u/ss 406, 420 r/w s. 34 of IPC and S. 3,4,5 and 6 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.”
From the above, it is clear that the substratum of
the prosecution case is shattered by the judgment
delivered by the lower court, while acquitting the co- accused. Therefore, this court is of the view that the continuation of the prosecution will be an abuse of process of court and it will be a judicial waste of time. Therefore, this Crl.M.C can be allowed. Hence this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.149/2020 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur are quashed. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 5273/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED AS M.P 724/2012 DATED 30-12- 2011 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR ANNEXURE B CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT
SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO. 278/2012 BEFORE THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THRISSUR ANNEXURE C CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.C NO. 91/2014 DATED 29-12-2014 ON THE FILES OF COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28- 10-2019 IN CRL.M.C NO 6511 OF 2019 RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE