Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 9TH BHADRA, 1944 SC 479/2015 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - IV, KOZHIKODE CRIME NO.1191/2010 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1: ABDULLA AGED 33 YEARS S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, PANAYULLATHIL HOUSE, PONMERI PARAMBIL P.O., MANGILATTU, VATAKARA TALUK. BY ADV ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL RESPONDENT/STATE OF KERALA: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-695 001. ADV. SREEJA V. -PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.1191/2010 of Vadakara Police Station. The aforesaid crime was registered against the petitioner and another, alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.
2. The prosecution case is that on 10.11.2010 at about 11 p.m.,
the accused threw bombs and caused explosions in the road margin in front of the Muslim League office, which is situated at Mangaladu, Ayanchery Village thereby provoking the locals in that area to cause rioting. Annexure 1 is the Final Report submitted by the Police.
3. Based on Annexure 1 Final Report, the trial was conducted
by the Additional Sessions Court IV, Kozhikode as S.C. No.752/2017, in which participated. Annexure 3 is the judgment passed in the said case and as per the same, the 2nd accused was found not guilty and accordingly, he was acquitted. The case against the petitioner was split up and refilled as S.C. No.479/2015. Later, the same was included in the long pending register as L.P. No.17/2017. Subsequently, the petitioner
surrendered before the court and the same now stands refilled as S.C. No.607/2021. This Crl.M.C. is filed by the petitioner for quashing all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure 1 Final Report.
4. Heard Sri.Zubair Pulikool, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Sreeja V., learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
5. The case of the petitioner is that consequent to the finding
entered by the learned Sessions Judge in Annexure 3 judgment, the substratum of the prosecution case is lost. Hence, further prosecution of the petitioner is unwarranted. Reliance was also placed on the principles laid down by this Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552], wherein it was held that, in cases where the substratum of the case is lost consequent to the acquittal of the co-accused, the prosecution could be quashed by invoking the powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
6. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor would oppose the aforesaid contention.
7. I have gone through the contents of Annexure 1 Final Report
and Annexure 3 judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge. The learned counsel for the petitioner produced the deposition of the occurrence witnesses as Annexure A4 to A7 along with the C.M. Application 1/2022, and I have perused the said documents as well. It is discernible from the said documents that PW1, on whose instance the crime was registered, had clearly deposed before the court that he did not see the accused persons throwing bombs. His specific statement is that, he named the accused persons before the police based on the information given to him by some other persons. PWs 2 to 4 are the other eyewitnesses to the incident. None of the aforesaid witnesses supported the prosecution case, and according to them, they could not identify the accused persons. Even though the prosecution had a definite case that the aforesaid witnesses detained the accused persons immediately after the incident, even that was denied by the said witnesses. Therefore, taking note of the fact that the prosecution adduced no evidence, the learned Sessions Judge found the 2nd accused not guilty of the offences. Considering the nature of the evidence that has been let in by the prosecution and appreciation of the same that the learned Sessions Judge has made, as
evidenced by Annexure 3, it can be seen that the substratum of the prosecution case is lost. Therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by conducting the prosecution of the petitioner. Hence, I am of the view that this is a fit case in which the powers of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked by applying the principles laid down by this Court in Moosa’s case (supra).
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed, Annexure 1 Final Report submitted in Crime No.1191/2010 of Vatakara Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant thereto, including the proceedings in S.C. No.607/2021, pending before the Additional Sessions Court IV, Kozhikode as against the petitioner are hereby quashed.
Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE scs APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4148/2020 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.1191/2010 OF VATAKARA POLICE STATION DATED 03.09.2014. ANNEXURE 2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC NO.7455/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 30.07.2019. ANNEXURE 3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN SC AND SESSIONS JUDGE-IV, KOZHIKODE.
ANNEXURE A4 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW1 ANNEXURE A5 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW2 ANNEXURE A6 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW3 ANNEXURE A7 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW4