Anoop vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 9121 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
  WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 1ST BHADRA, 1945
                   CRL.MC NO. 4253 OF 2023

   CRIME NO.641/2009 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM

  IN SC NO.265/2017 (LP NO.12/2018) OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
 COURT & SESSIONS COURT (VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN & CHILDREN)
                         ERNAKULAM

PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED :

           ANOOP
           AGED 42 YEARS, S/O JOSE,
           KUDILIL HOUSE, ONAKKUR VILLAGE,
           ANCHELPETTY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.,
           PIN - 686667

           BY ADVS.
           M.J.SANTHOSH
           ARUN ANTONY (K/1053/2011)

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :

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

           BY SRI. VIPIN NARAYAN, SR.PP

     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.M.C No.4253 of 2023                2




                                   ORDER

The instant petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure ("the Code") for the sake of brevity.

2. The petitioner herein is the 2nd accused in S.C. No.265/2017 (L.P.

No.12/2018) on the files of the Additional Sessions Court (For the trial of

cases relating to Atrocities & Sexual Violence against Women and Children),

Ernakulam. In the said case, he is facing prosecution for having committed

the offences punishable under Section 395 of the IPC and Sections 3(5),

7(b) r/w Section 25(1)(b)(a)(c) of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution allegation is that on 27.5.2009 at 3 am, the

petitioner herein along with the rest of the accused committed the offence

of robbery.

4. The petitioner states that the aforesaid case originated from

Crime No.641/2009 of the Panangad Police station. In the final report which

was laid before the court, eight persons were arrayed as accused. As the

petitioner was not available for trial, the case against the rest of the accused

was proceeded with and by Annexure-A6 judgment, accused Nos.1 and 3 to

8 were found not guilty and they were acquitted of all charges.

5. It is on the basis of the acquittal of the co-accused that this

petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that the

substratum of the case against the petitioner has been shattered.

6. Sri. Santhosh M.J, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, has relied on the judgments rendered by this Court in Moosa v.

Sub Inspector of Police [2006 (1) KLJ 349], Abbas T.K. v. State of

Kerala [2013 KHC 336], Jalalu Rajan and Anr v. State of Kerala [2013

KHC 177] and Ashraf Kancheriyil v. State of Kerala [2011 (2) KHC 812]

and it was urged that the continuance of proceedings against the petitioner

herein would serve no purpose.

7. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor.

8. I have gone through Annexure-A6 judgment of acquittal

rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. In paragraph No. 7 of

the Judgment, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has noted that the

prosecution had examined only PWs 1 to 3 to prove its case. PWs 1 and 2

did not support the prosecution case and PW3 tendered evasive evidence.

The court concluded that there is no evidence to link the accused with the

crime and they were acquitted under Section 232 of the Cr.P.C. As held by a

three-Judge Bench of this Court in Moosa v. 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 herein to undergo the ordeal of a 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. Furthermore, no

evidence of worth could be adduced by the prosecution during the previous

trial. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that this

Court will be well justified in invoking the powers under Section 482 of the

Code and in quashing the proceedings.

Resultantly, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A2 final report in Crime

No.641 of 2009 of the Panangad Police Station and all further proceedings

pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as S.C. No.265/2017

(L.P. No.12/2018) on the files of the Additional Sessions Court (For the trial

of cases relating to Atrocities & Sexual Violence against Women and

Children), Ernakulam, are quashed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE NS

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 4253/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES :

Annexure-A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.

641/2009 OF PANANGAD POLICE STATION DATED 27/05/2009

Annexure-A2 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN S.C.NO.265/2017(L.P. NO.12/2018) DATED 30/04/2010.

Annexure-A3 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF DEPOSITION OF PW1/CW1 DATED 27/07/2016.

Annexure-A4 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF DEPOSITION OF PW2/CW2 DATED 27/07/2016.

Annexure-A5 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF DEPOSITION OF PW3/CW7 DATED 02/02/2017.

Annexure-A6 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT IN SESSION CASE NO.393/2012 DATED 08/02/2017.