Anas Ali v. State of Kerala

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V** **THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/21ST ASWINA, 1938** ## **Crl.MC.No. 6349 of 2016 ()** **--------------------------CC.NO. 497/2011 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALAPPUZHA CRIME NO. 406/2005 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ---------------------------** **PETITIONER/ACCUSED.:** **------------------------------------** **ANAS ALI, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O MOHAMMED ALI, MUMTAZ MANZIL, NEDUNGATTU, KARUVATTA, ALAPPUZHA. PIN-690 517** **BY ADVS.SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN SRI.K.NIRMALAN** **RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.: ---------------------------------------------** **STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PIN-682 031** **BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. AMJAD ALI** **THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts** ## **Crl.MC.No. 6349 of 2016 ()** ## **--------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES: ----------------------------------------------** **ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE F.I.R. IN CRIME NO.406/2005 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.406/2005 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CC NO.600/2006 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-1, ALAPPUZHA.** **RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL** **------------------------------------------------** **/TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE** **sts** ## **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, V., J.** ------------------------------------------ ## **Crl.M.C. No.6349 of 2016** -----------------------------------------Dated this the 13[th] day of October, 2016 ## **O R D E R ~~~~~~~~** - 1.This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. - 2.The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.497 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Alappuzha. The aforesaid case is a split up case from C.C.No.600 of 2006 on the file of the aforesaid court in which, the petitioner was arrayed as the 3[rd] accused. The case has arisen from Crime No.406 of 2006 of Alappuzha South Police Station. - 3.The prosecution allegation is that on 18.8.2005 at 3.30 p.m, the accused Nos. 1 to 4 wrongfully restrained **Crl.M.C. No.6349 of 2016 -2-** CW2 and when the de facto complainant objected the same, the 1[st] accused is alleged to have beaten him by his hands and the accused Nos. 2 to 4 is alleged to have caused simple hurt. It is further alleged that when the de facto complainant had fallen down the 1[st] accused is alleged to have hit him with a reaper and the 2[nd] accused with a soda bottle. - 4.The petitioner did not appear before the court below and face the trial and therefore, the case was proceeded against accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4. - 5.By Annexure-A3 judgment dated 13.1.2010, the accused who faced trial were extended the benefit of doubt and were acquitted. The said judgment has become final. - 6.This petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that the substratum of the case as against the petitioner has been shattered in view of the acquittal of **Crl.M.C. No.6349 of 2016 -3-** the co-accused. - 7.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor. 8.I have gone through Annexure-A2 final report and Annexure-A3 judgment by which the co-accused have been acquitted. It is evident from paragraph No.5 of Annexure-A3 judgment that even the injured witness has turned adverse to the prosecution and the witnesses had stated before court that no such incident as alleged had taken place. The learned Magistrate on the basis of the above materials came to the conclusion that there was not even an iota of material to connect the accused with the crime and they were acquitted. These observations of the court below clearly reveals that no purpose will be served even if the petitioner is directed to face the trial. As held by a three Judge Bench of this Court in **Moosa v.** **Crl.M.C. No.6349 of 2016** **-4-** **Sub Inspector of Police** (2006 (1) KLT 552), though the reasoning of the judgment contained or appreciation of evidence in the case of a co-accused therein are not grounds to attract any relief under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a case where the substratum of the case is lost is an exception to the above rule. - 9.I am of the firm view that no purpose is going to be served by directing the petitioner to face the trial at this stage. It can only be a futile exercise and will only serve to waste precious judicial time which can be used for more productive work. The prospects of conviction is extremely remote as no evidence of worth could be adduced by the prosecution during the previous trial. This Court will be justified in quashing the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code. **Crl.M.C. No.6349 of 2016** **-5-** In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A2 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as C.C.No.497 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-I, Alappuzha are quashed. **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, V. JUDGE** Ps/13/10/16 # **Crl.M.C. No.6349 of 2016 -6-**