Musthafa vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 19231 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
    TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 23RD BHADRA, 1943
                     CRL.MC NO. 3621 OF 2021
AGAINST THE CP.NO 8/2021 OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS
  - I, KALPETTA, IN CRIME NO.26/1993 OF MEPPADI POLICE STATION.
PETITIONER/ACCUSED (ACCUSED NOS.25 IN THE CHARGE SHEET):

          MUSTHAFA
          AGED 55 YEARS
          S/O. ALAVI,
          KILIYAMANNIL HOUSE,
          KOTTAPPADI AMSOM
          MEPPADI,
          WAYANAD DISTRICT

          BY ADVS.
          CELINE JOSEPH
          BENNY P.S
          MANEESHA JOY


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

          STATE OF KERALA
          SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEPPADI,
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031



          SR.PP - SRI. HRITHWIK C.S.



     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.3621 of 2021
                                        2


                                    ORDER

This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.PC by the

25th accused in Crime No.26/1993 of the Meppadi Police Station, in

Wayand District, which was registered alleging offence punishable

under Sections 143, 147, 148, 450, 436 and 427 read with 149 of the

IPC. The subject matter of the crime was mischief by fire allegedly

committed at "Mattathil Wines" by 25 odd persons at about 8.00 p.m

on 25.02.1993. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was

laid before Court. On committal, it came before the Assistant

Sessions Court, Sulthanbathery as SC.No.8/1995. There were 29

accused persons in the final report, out of them, 25 accused faced

trial and by judgment dated 31.03.1997, the learned Assistant

Sessions Judge found them not guilty and acquitted under Section

232 of Cr.P.C. The Annexure A1 is the judgment in which they were

acquitted.

2. Petitioner is the 25th accused in the final report. The Crl.M.C

is moved for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioner

as CP.No.8/2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court,

Kalpetta. The learned counsel has submitted that under Annexure A1, Crl.M.C.No.3621 of 2021

25 accused persons have been acquitted since none of the material

witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution did support the

prosecution case. According to her, even if the procedure is repeated

against the petitioner, the case is not going to improve. Hence, the

proceedings are sought to be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

3. I heard the learned Senior Public Prosecutor also.

4. After hearing counsel on both sides and assessing the reasons

for acquitting 25 accused persons, I do not think that the petitioner is

required to face trial. I have carefully gone through Annexure A1

judgment in S.C.No.8/1995. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge has

stated that out of the six material witnesses, only three could be traced

and examined for the case. They did not support the prosecution case.

All the three eye witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution. Some of

the remaining witnesses who had allegedly partially witnessed the

incident also did not support the case. Even though repeated coercive

steps were taken against the remaining material witnesses, who had

allegedly witnessed the incident, their presence could not be procured

for examination. Thus after making formal questioning of the accused

under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C all the 25 accused persons were

acquitted under Section 232 of the Cr.P.C. Crl.M.C.No.3621 of 2021

5. The incident had happened in 1993. More than 18 years

have passed. By lapse of long time situation has become worse and

at this distance of time, it may not be possible to procure material

witnesses in the case. All those witnesses who were examined before

the Court turned hostile to the prosecution. Even if they are available

and examined for the present purpose, they can not support the case.

In the circumstances, it will be idle to send the petitioner for trial.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

learned Magistrate has already committed the case. Even then in the

above stated circumstances, it would be futile to repeat the procedure

again. It would be a waste of time and energy for the court and the

prosecuting agency to attend such a case. Therefore, entire

proceedings taken against the petitioner pursuant to the final report in

Crime No. 26/1993 of Meppadi Police Station shall stand quashed.

The Crl.MC is allowed.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL JUDGE

Jms/14.09

//True Copy// P.A to Judge Crl.M.C.No.3621 of 2021

APPENDIX OF CRL.M.C.NO.3621/2021

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.03.1997 IN S.C.NO.8/1995 ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.MC. 126/2021 DATED 12.03.2021 OF THE SESSIONS COURT, KALPETTA WAYANAD.

ANNEXURE A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW1 IN S.C. NO.8/95 OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY ANNEXURE A4 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW2 IN SC.8/95 OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, SULTHAN BATHERY ANNEXURE A5 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND OTHER ACCUSED PERSONS IN CRIME NO.26/1993 OF MEPPADI POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A6 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET OF MEPPADI POLICE STATION ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME NO.26/1993 OF MEPPADI POLICE STATION.