Kerala High Court
Abhilash vs State Of Kerala on 25 September, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Crl.M.C. No.6342 of 2018
1
2024:KER:71202
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 3RD ASWINA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 6342 OF 2018
CRIME NO.105/2005 OF TOWN EAST POLICE STATION, THRISSUR
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CC NO.107 OF
2018 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,THRISSUR
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1:
ABHILASH
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O. BHASI, PARAPPUPARAMBIL, KIZHAKKUMPATTUKARA,
CHEBUKKAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 689 699.
BY ADV. AJEESH K.SASI
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.
BY ADV.
SRI.SANAL P.RAJ, PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No.6342 of 2018
2
2024:KER:71202
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.6342 of 2018
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of September, 2024
ORDER
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed to quash the
proceedings in C.C. No.107/2018 on the file of the Chief
Judicial Magistrate Court, Thrissur arising from Crime
No.105/2005 of Thrissur East Police Station.
2. The petitioner is the original 1 st accused in C.C.
No.186/2005 before the same court. The petitioner was
not able to appear before the trial court, and the case
against the other accused was tried and disposed of by
the learned Magistrate, acquitting them. Annexure B is
the judgment. The contention of the petitioner is that, in
the light of Annexure B judgment, the continuation of the
prosecution against the petitioner is an abuse of process
2024:KER:71202
of court.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. This Court perused Annexure B judgment. It
will be better to extract Paragraph No.10 of Annexure B
judgment:
"10. From the evidence adduced by the
prosecution, it it seen that there is no evidence against A2
to A4 to connect them with the alleged offences. Whatever
evidences adduced by the prosecution is only against A1.
The prosecution could not produce CW2 to CW4 the
material witnesses in this case. There is absolutely no
evidence against A2 to A4 to connect them with the
offences charged. Therefore it is found that the
prosecution has failed to prove any of the offences
charged against the accused under sections 468, 471, 420
and 34 of the IPC. Accordingly, point No.1 is found against
the prosecution."
5. It is stated in the above paragraph that,
whatever evidences adduced by the prosecution is only
against the 1st accused. This is disputed by the counsel
2024:KER:71202
appearing for the petitioner. According to the counsel,
there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioner that
he committed forgery. It is also the case of the counsel
that the averment in Paragraph No.10 of Annexure B that
the evidence is adduced against the 1 st accused is without
any material.
6. I don't want to make any observation about the
same. The petitioner has to surrender before the
jurisdictional court and face trial. All the contentions
raised by the petitioner in this Crl.M.C. are left open. This
Court can not invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
to quash the proceedings in the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case in the light of the principle laid
down by the Full Bench of this Court in Moosa v. Sub
Inspector of Police [2006 KHC 184]. But I make it clear
that the petitioner is free to file a discharge petition
before the jurisdictional court, if charge is not framed.
2024:KER:71202
Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is
disposed of in the following manner:
1. The petitioner is free to file a discharge
petition before the jurisdictional court
within thirty days from the date of
receipt of a stamped certified copy of
this order, if charge is not framed.
2. Once such a discharge petition is
received, the jurisdictional court will
consider the same and pass
appropriate orders in it, after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner
and the Prosecutor concerned, as
expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within a period of six weeks from the
date of receipt of the discharge
petition.
3. If a discharge petition is filed as
2024:KER:71202
directed above, the presence of the
petitioner shall not be insisted, till final
orders are passed in the discharge
petition.
4. All the contentions raised by the
petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous
case are left open and the petitioner is
free to agitate the same in the
discharge petition.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
DM JUDGE
2024:KER:71202
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
NO.105/2005 OF THRISSUR EAST POLICE
STATION.
ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
13.12.2011 IN C.C.NO.186/2005 OF THE
COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE, THRISSUR.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
