Vineeth R. Pillai v. State of Kerala and Others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 18[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 26TH ASWINA, 1945 CRL.MC NO. 9423 OF 2022 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT SC 537/2016 OF DISTRICT COURT & ``` ## **`SESSIONS COURT,KOLLAM`** ## **`PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED:`** ``` VINEETH R. PILLAI ``` ``` AGED 26 YEARS, S/O RAVEENDRAN PILLAI, MOOLAYIL VEEDU, NEAR THEVANNOOR GOVT. H.S.S., THEVANNOOR CHERY, ELAMADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT., PIN - 691533 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ALEXANDER GEORGE SOUMYA FRANCIS ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC`** ``` PROSECUTION, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 ``` - **`2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE`** ``` KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691001 ``` - **`3 MANEESH SURENDRAN`** ``` AGED 28 YEARS, S/O SURENDRAN PILLAI, KOCHU KALEECKAL VEEDU, PEEDIKAYIL JUNCTION, UMAYANALLOOR KIZHAKKE CHERIYIL, MAYYANADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691303 ``` 2 ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` ``` BY ADVS. ``` ``` SMT. SREEJA. V PP SMT.T.P. AISWARYA ``` ``` THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` 3 **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------Crl.M.C. No. 9423 of 2022 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 18[th] day of October, 2023** ## **O R D E R** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed by the 4[th] accused in S.C. No.537/2016 on the file of District and Sessions Court, Kollam arising from Crime No.2399/2015 of Kollam East Police Station. The above case is charge sheeted against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147,148,341,323,324 and 308 r/w 149 of IPC. 4 ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` 3. It is submitted that the co-accused were already acquitted as per Annexure-A3 judgment. In the light of the same, the continuation of prosecution against the petitioner is an abuse of process of court. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. 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. 6. This Court in **Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552), Abbas T.K. v. State of** ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` 5 **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 judgement 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 will be an abuse of process of court. It will be beneficial to extract the relevant portion of the judgment by which the co-accused is acquitted: “8. Point nos:1 to 9:For the sake of convenient, point nos.1 to 9 are discussed ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` 6 together. PW1 to PW5 turned hostile to the prosecution and there is nothing incriminating the accused in their testimony. According to PW1 he has sustained injuries. It was a massive attack and as such he had no opportunity to identify the real assailants. In Ext.P1 FIS accused are named on the basis of heresay information. PW2 to PW5 have also deposed on like terms with PW1 and they failed to identify the accused. PW1 to PW4 injured witness turned hostile to the prosecution. All coercive steps to procure the presence of CW4 were in vain. Nothing was brought on record to prove the identify of the accused. The available evidence on record are insufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts for any of the alleged offences and the accused are entitled to get the benefit of doubt. Ponts 1 to 9 are answered in the nagative.” 7. 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 7 ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` 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. Hence, this Crl. M.C. can be allowed. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner alone in S.C. No.537/2016 on the file of District and Sessions Court, Kollam arising from Crime No.2399/2015 of Kollam East Police Station, are quashed. Sd/- nvj **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** ``` CRL. M.C. NO.9423 OF 2022 ``` 8 ## **`APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 9423/2022`** ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ``` - `ANNEXURE NO.1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 2399/2015 OF KOLLAM EAST POLICE STATION` - `ANNEXURE NO.2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 2399/2015 FIELD BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT` - `ANNEXURE NO.3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER IN S.C. NO. 537/2016 BY THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM` - `ANNEXURE4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT / 3RD RESPONDENT` RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE