Kerala High Court
Aneez Khan vs State Of Kerala on 26 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944
CRL.MC NO. 3731 OF 2021
CRIME NO.1454/2015 OF Perinthalmanna Police Station,
Malappuram
JUDGMENTCC 439/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS
-I, PERINTHALMANNA
PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:
ANEEZKHAN
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O. SAIDALAVI, RESIDING AT UNNIYALUNGAL HOUSE,
PANDIKKAD P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679338.
BY ADV SURAJ.S
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT
OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682031.
SMT. T.V. NEEMA, SR. PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.3731/2021
-:2:-
ORDER
Dated this the 26th day of August, 2022
This Crl.M.C has been filed to quash the proceedings
against the petitioner on the ground of acquittal of the remaining
accused.
2. The petitioner is the 1st accused. The crime was
registered against the petitioner and accused Nos. 2 and 3 as
Crime No.1454/2015 of Perinthalmanna Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 448, 323, 324, 354, 355
and 294(b) read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. The prosecution case in short is that on 22.11.2015 at
4.30 pm, the petitioner along with the remaining accused, in
furtherance of common intention trespassed into the house of the
defacto complainant, abused her in filthy language and assaulted
her. When the mother of the defacto complainant intervened,
the accused assaulted her as well.
4. After completing the investigation, the final report was
Crl.M.C.No.3731/2021
filed. Annexure A2 is the final report. The accused Nos. 2 and 3
alone faced trial. The learned Sessions Judge after fullfledged
trial found that the prosecution failed to prove the offence
against the accused and accordingly, the accused Nos.2 and 3
were acquitted. Annexure A3 is the judgment. Since the present
petitioner did not appear, the case as against him was split up
and re-numbered as C.C.No.439/2019. According to the
petitioner, in view of the acquittal of the remaining accused, the
substratum of the prosecution case is dislodged. It is in these
circumstances that he filed this Crl.M.C invoking Section 482 of
Cr.P.C.
5. I have heard Sri. Suraj S., the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt. T.V. Neema, the learned Senior Public
Prosecutor.
6. To prove the prosecution case, PW1 to PW11 were
examined. PW1 and PW2 are the injured and PW3 and PW4 are
the eye witnesses. The court below on analysis of evidence
found that the evidence tendered by PW1 and PW2 is not
sufficient to attract the offences. PW3 and PW4 deposed that
Crl.M.C.No.3731/2021
they did not see the incident. The doctor was examined as PW7,
who deposed that there was no external injury. A reading of
Annexure A3 would show that the substratum of the prosecution
case is dislodged.
7. The Apex Court in Sahadevan & another v. State of
Tamil Nadu [2012 (6) SCC 403] has held that, if the entire
prosecution case has been found to be unreliable and the
prosecution as a whole has not been able to prove its case
beyond reasonable doubt, then benefit should accrue to all the
accused persons and not merely to the accused who faced trial.
The Full Bench of this Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of
Police [2006 (1) KLT 552] in paragraph 50 held that in a case
where the very substratum of the case is lost by the acquittal of
the co-accused, the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. could
be invoked.
8. This is a case where the entire prosecution case was
found to be unreliable and the prosecution as a whole has not
been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, no
purpose will be served in proceeding with the trial of the case.
Crl.M.C.No.3731/2021
For these reasons, I am of the view that this is a fit case
where the jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482
of Cr.P.C could be invoked. Accordingly, all further proceedings
as against the petitioner in C.C.No.439/2019 on the file of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Perinthalmanna hereby
stands quashed. The Crl.M.C is allowed.
sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
kp
Crl.M.C.No.3731/2021
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 3731/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.1454 OF 2015 OF PERINTHALMANNA POLICE
STATION.
Annexure A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.1454 OF 2015 OF PERINTHALMANNA
POLICE STATION.
Annexure A3 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
29.8.2019 IN C.C.NO.179 OF 2016 OF THE
JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,
PERINTHALMANNA.
