Kerala High Court
Meethalthazhe Muhammed ... vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2025
Author: Kauser Edappagath
Bench: Kauser Edappagath
Crl.M.C.No.4317/2020
1
2025:KER:61451
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 4317 OF 2020
CRIME NO.347/1995 OF Payyannur Police Station, Kannur
IN SC NO.1112 OF 2017 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT AND
SESSIONS COURT-II, THALASSERY
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2:
MEETHALTHAZHE MUHAMMED KUNHI, AGED 57 YEARS
S/O ABDULLA.K,RAMANTHALI AMSOM, MOTTAKUNNU, KANNUR
DISTRICT,PIN-670308.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.BINU
SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM-682031.
*ADDL.R2 ELIYAS DAVID,AGED 62 YEARS, S/O ELIYAS,
KOLLEMCODE,POZHIYOOR.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT-629160
*ADDL.R3 DARVIN, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O
STEPHEN,VADIVILAI,VADIVILAI.P.O,KANYAKUMARI
DISTRICT,TAMIL NADU-629802.
*ADDL.R4 VARGHESE,AGED 67 YEARS, S/O KARLOS,
NEYYATTINKARA,POZHIYOOR.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT-695513.
*(ADDITIONAL R2, R3 & R4 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 30.6.2022 IN CRLMA 2/22 IN CRLMC
4317/2020)
Crl.M.C.No.4317/2020
2
2025:KER:61451
**ADDL.R5 NALUPURAPATTIL ARAKKA VALAPPIL UMMAR, AGED 55
S/O KUNHI MOIDEEN HAJI, ETTIKKULAM, RAMANATHALI
AMSOM, KANNUR DISTRICT -670308
**( IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R5 AS PER ORDER
DATED.04.06.2025 IN CRLMA 3/2025 IN CRLMC
4317/2020)
SRI.SANGEETHA RAJ.N.R-PP
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 14.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C.No.4317/2020
3
2025:KER:61451
ORDER
This Crl.M.C has been filed to quash the proceedings
against the petitioner on the ground of the acquittal of the
remaining accused.
2. The petitioner is the accused No.2. A crime was
registered against the petitioner and accused Nos. 1 and 3 as
Crime No.347/1995 of Payyannur Police Station, Kannur. The
offences alleged are punishable under Sections 323, 324, 435 and
436 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution case in short is that on
29.11.1995 at 11 pm, the accused in furtherance of their common
intention to cause loss to CW1, set fire to his fishing net and boat
machine which were kept in the room Nos.518 and 597 of ward
No.X and caused a loss of ₹1,30,000/-. It is further alleged that
they also assaulted CW2 to CW4 who were sleeping in those
rooms with stick.
4. After completing the investigation, final report
was filed. Annexure III is the final report. The accused No.1
alone faced trial. The trial court after a full-fledged trial found
that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the
accused. Accordingly, he was acquitted. Annexure II is the
2025:KER:61451
judgment of the trial court. Since the present petitioner/accused
No.2 and accused No.3 did not appear for trial, the case as against
them was split up and refiled and now the case against the
petitioner has been renumbered as S.C.No.1112/2017 on the files
of the Additional District and Sessions Court-II, Thalassery.
According to the petitioner, in view of the acquittal of the accused
No.1, the substratum of the prosecution case is dislodged. It is in
these circumstances, he has filed this Crl.M.C invoking Section
482 of Cr.P.C.
5. I have heard Sri. Zubair Pulikool, the learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Sangeetha Raj N.R., the learned
Public Prosecutor. The defacto complainant and the injured were
impleaded as respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Even though they received
notice, they did not enter appearance.
6. In the trial of the accused No.1, to prove the
prosecution case, PW1 to PW10 were examined. PW1 is the
defacto complainant. The presence of CW2 to CW4 who were the
injured could not be secured by the trial court in spite of earnest
effort. Even though notice was issued by this Court to them, they
did not appear. It appears that they are not interested in the
proceedings. PW1 deposed that he did not know the culprits who
set fire to the building. His evidence was hardly sufficient to
2025:KER:61451
prove the prosecution case. PW2 also could not identify the
accused. PW3 and PW4 did not support the prosecution case.
PW5, another witness examined also deposed that he does not
know who was responsible for setting fire to the building. A
reading of Annexure II judgment would show that the substratum
of the prosecution case was dislodged.
7. The Supreme Court of India in Sahadevan &
another v. State of Tamil Nadu [2012 (6) SCC 403] has held
that, if the entire prosecution 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 have
preferred an appeal against conviction. The Full Bench of the
Kerala High 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. It is
a case where the entire prosecution case was found to be
unreliable and prosecution as a whole had not been able to prove
its case beyond reasonable doubt. The defacto complainant who
was examined as PW1 deposed that he did not know the culprit
who set fire to the building. The remaining injured witnesses
2025:KER:61451
(CW2 to CW4) were not present before the court to give evidence.
Even though notice had been served to them by this Court, they
did not appear. For these reasons, I am of the view that no
purpose will be served in proceeding with the trial against the
petitioner. Accordingly, all further proceedings against the
petitioner, pursuant to Crime No.347/1995 of Payyannur Police
Station, Kannur in S.C.No.1112/2017 on the files of the Additional
District and Sessions Court-II, Thalassery stands hereby quashed.
The Crl.M.C is allowed.
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
kp
2025:KER:61451
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR AND POLICE
CHARGE IN CRIME NO.347/1995 OF PAYYANNUR
POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE II THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
S.C.NO.98/2000 BY ADDL.SESSIONS JUDGE-I,
THALASSERY.
Annexure III CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CRIME NO.347/1995 OF PAYYANNUR POLICE
STATION DATED 29.01.1997
