Kerala High Court
Prem Navas vs State Of Kerala on 24 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MAY 2023 / 3RD JYAISHTA, 1945
CRL.MC NO. 2285 OF 2023
AGAINST SC NO.69/2020 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS
COURT - V, KOLLAM
CRIME NO.400/2001 OF PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION
PETITIONER/15TH ACCUSED :
PREM NAVAS
AGED 53 YEARS
S/O.SHAJAHAN, FIROZ MANZIL,
NEAR POLICE STATION, PATHANAPURAM P.O,
PATHANAPURAM KOLLAM, PIN - 689695
BY ADVS.
K.SIJU
S.ABHILASH
ANJANA KANNATH
RESPONDENTS/STATE :
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 682031
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 689695
SRI TR RENJITH, SR. PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.05.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C No.2285 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 15th accused in Crime No.400 of
2001 of Pathanapuram Police Station registered inter alia under Sections 143,
145, 147, 148, 332, 324, 307, 427, 283, and 188 r/w section 149 of the IPC
and under Section 3(2)(e) of the PDDP Act, 1984. The investigation was
conducted, and final report was laid before the jurisdictional court by arraying
35 named accused and 465 others who were unidentified.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 01.11.2001, about 500 numbers,
out of which 35 men could be identified at sight, formed themselves into an
unlawful assembly and took out a procession to the Pathanapuram Police
Station to protest the unnatural deaths of a certain Suresh and his wife. When
the Police intervened to pacify the irate mob, they pelted stones at the Police
Station and caused injuries to CWs 1, 10, 11, 13 and 14. It was also alleged
that the mob caused damages to the Police jeep, causing a total loss of
Rs.5,300/-.
4. Annexure A3 common judgment dated 27.6.2013 would reveal
that 26 of the co-accused faced trial in SC No's 304/2009, SC.596/2009, SC
106/2010, SC 214/2011 and SC 733/2011 were acquitted of all charges.
5. Later, the 14th accused surrendered before the Trial Court, and
the case against him was taken on file as SC No. 1440/2019 on the file of the
Additional Sessions Judge. The 14th accused approached this court
contending that the substratum of the case is lost due to the acquittal of the
co-accused, and by Annexure A4 order dated 22.8.22 in Crl MC No 386/2022,
the proceeding against the said accused was quashed.
6. 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.
7. Sri. Siju Kamalasanan, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, has relied on the judgments rendered by this Court in Moosa v.
Sub Inspector of Police1 [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 petitioners
herein would serve no purpose.
8. I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor.
9 I have gone through the Annexure-A2 final report and
Annexure-A3 common judgment of acquittal rendered by the court below and
Annexure A4 order passed by this Court. On going through Annexure A3 it is
evident that the independent witnesses who were examined as PWs 1 to 5
failed to support the prosecution. Even the police officers who were examined
as PWs. 8, 21 and 22 failed to identify the accused. As many as 500 persons
had gathered at the place of occurrence while the incident occurred. The
Sessions Judge refused to give any credence to the evidence tendered by
PW1. The Court below, after meticulous analysis of the evidence on record,
came to the conclusion that the accused was entitled to acquittal under
Section 235 of the Code. 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.
10. 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. 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.
11. Resultantly, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A2 final report in
Crime No. 400 of 2001 of the Pathanapuram Police Station and all further
proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as
S.C.No.69 of 2020 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Court-V,
Kollam, are quashed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V.,
JUDGE
ps/-
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2285/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES :
Annexure A1 . THE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.400/2001 OF
PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION DATED 1.11.2001
Annexure A2 THE COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.400/2001
OF PATHANAPURAM POLICE STATION DATED
20.11.2003
Annexure A3 THE COPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE
ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II,
KOLLAM DATED 27.6.2013 IN SC NOS. 304/2009
Annexure A4 THE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN CRL.M.C NO.386/2022
DATED 22.8.2022
