Surendran vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 20301 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
    THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 8TH ASWINA, 1943
                     CRL.MC NO. 7662 OF 2019
 CC 35/2018 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT - I,PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 2:

          SURENDRAN
          AGED 43 YEARS
          S/O.KESAVAN,
          MAATHUR HOUSE,
          MUDAPPALLUR,
          PALAKKAD.

          BY ADV. V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)


RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:

          STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
          HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
          ERNAKULAM-682031.


          BY SRI. RENJITH T.R., SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR



     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C.No.7662 OF 2019            2




                                 ORDER

Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No. 385/2013 of

Kuzhalmannam police station which was registered on 20.03.2013,

alleging offence under Section 379 read with 34 of the Indian Penal

Code. The petitioner has moved this Court for quashing the

proceedings against him now pending as L.P. No. 11/2019 before

the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - I, Palakkad. According

to him, accused Nos. 1 and 3 have already faced trial in C.C. No.

2101/2013 before that court and they stand acquitted; at that time,

he was absconding and later case against him has been transferred

to Long Pending Register and refiled as L.P. No.11/2019; now

warrant is pending against him. The learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that there is absolutely no material to connect the

involvement of the petitioner who is running business in steel, that

his lorry was allegedly used for stealing steel worth Rs.10,260/-,

which was allegedly transported from a place Kaliyath Steel

Traders to Chikkago International at Kumarakom, Kottayam.

2. According to the learned counsel, Annexure B

judgment clearly indicates that the petitioner played no role in the

alleged commission of crime. Moreover, by the said judgment, the

substratum of the case has been lost, therefore, there is no purpose

in putting him for trial.

3. I heard the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. My

attention has been drawn to Annexure B judgment. As rightly

pointed out, after trial of accused Nos. 1 and 3, it has come out that

prosecution could not make out any evidence regarding the

involvement of accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the alleged incident. This

being the finding of the trial court, there is no purpose in putting

the petitioner for trial. As rightly pointed out, Annexure B cuts the

root of any scope for further prosecution. By Annexure B, accused

Nos. 1 and 3 have been found not guilty and acquitted under

Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The judgment

dated 12.01.2018 has become final. In the circumstances, it is idle

to put the petitioner for trial.

4. Resultantly, the proceedings in L.P. No. 11/2019

pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Palakkad

are hereby quashed.

Crl.M. C. is allowed as above.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL

JUDGE

DCS/04.10.2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CR.NO.385/2013 OF KUZHALMANNAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD.

ANNEXURE B CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.C.NO.2101/2013 OF THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, PALAKKAD DATED 12.1.2018.