[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Fasil vs State Of Kerala on 5 December, 2025
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
Crl.M.C. No. 10275 of 2025
2025:KER:94317
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10275 OF 2025
CRIME NO.643/2016 OF Kuttiyadi Police Station, Kozhikode
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN LP NO.1 OF 2021 OF
ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/SUB COURT/COMMERCIAL COURT, VADAKARA
PETITIONER/S:
FASIL
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O KUNHABDULLA,KIZHAKKE VEETIL MEETTHAL
HOUSE,CHERAPURAM(PO),KOZHIKODE DIST, PIN - 673507
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.DEVESH
SHRI.MURSHID ALI M.
SMT.JYOTHIS MARY
SMT.S.K.SREELAKSHMY
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAMKULAM,, PIN - 682031
OTHER PRESENT:
PP SRI M P PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.12.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.M.C. No. 10275 of 2025
2
2025:KER:94317
C.S.DIAS, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No.10275 of 2025
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of December, 2025
ORDER
The petitioner is accused in L.P.No. 1/2021 on
the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Vadakara
('Trial Court' for short), which has originated from
Crime No.643/2016, registered at the Kuttiyadi Police
Station, Kozhikode, wherein the petitioner was ranked
as accused no. 2, for allegedly the committing the
offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448,
436 and 427 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution allegation, in brief, is that;
On 15.07.2016, at 23:30 hours, the accused
persons, in prosecution of their common intention, had
formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with
deadly weapons and committed rioting. They
2025:KER:94317
trespassed into the house of the de-facto complainant
with deadly weapons, destroyed the window panes of
the house, set fire to a car, an auto rickshaw, and a
motorcycle of the de-facto complainant and caused a
loss of Rs.1,36,000/- to her. Thus, the accused have
committed the above offences.
3. The petitioner states that, he was unaware
that he was made an accused in the crime. He also did
not receive any summons from the Trial Court.
However, the trial against two other accused persons
(Muhammed Rabeeh and Riyas) had proceeded before
the Trial Court, and by Annexure A3 judgment, they
were acquitted on the finding that the prosecution had
failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the
accused persons had committed the above offences.
The petitioner is at par with the said accused persons.
In view of the specific findings in Annexure A3
judgment, no useful purpose will be served in
2025:KER:94317
prosecuting the trial against the petitioner. Therefore,
Annexure A3 judgment may enure to the benefit of the
petitioner also. It would be a sheer waste of judicial
time to proceed with the trial as against the petitioner.
Hence, the Crl.M.C.
4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. Crime No. 643/2016 was registered against
five accused persons, alleging them to have committed
the above offences. In the charge sheet the petitioner
has been ranked as the 2nd accused. Indisputably, the
petitioner did not participate in the trial.
6. On going through Annexure A3 judgment, I
find that the two accused persons mentioned above
had participated in the trial. Although PWs 1 to 3 were
examined by the prosecution, all three of them turned
hostile, and testified that they have not seen the
assailants. In view of the said oral testimony, the Trial
2025:KER:94317
Court gave up the evidence of CW2, and has found the
above two accused persons are not guilty of the
offences.
7. In Moosa V. Sub Inspector of Police
(2006 (1) KLT 552), a full Bench of this Court has
held that, in a case where the very substratum of the
case is lost by the acquittal of the co-accused, the
inherent power of this Court can be exercised to quash
the proceedings against the other accused persons.
The same view has been reiterated by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court and this Court in a plethora of
precedents on the above question of law.
8. I have carefully analysed the allegations in
Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2 Final Report and the
findings in Annexure A3 judgment. A reading of the
findings in Annexure A3 judgment substantiates that
the defacto complainant (PW1) had clearly testified
that she had not seen the assailants, and the statement
2025:KER:94317
recorded by the Investigating Officer that she had
identified two accused persons is false. Similarly, PWs
2 and 3 also turned hostile to the prosecution.
Accordingly, the prosecution gave up the examination
of CW2, the son of PW1. On the basis of the above
evidence, the Trial Court concluded that the
prosecution has miserably failed to prove beyond
reasonable doubt that the above accused persons have
committed the above offences.
9. In light of the above findings in Annexure A3
judgment, I am satisfied that the substratum of the
prosecution case has been lost. The said findings are
squarely applicable to the petitioner also. Even if the
petitioner withstands the ordeal of trial, I am definite
that it would not yield a different result than Annexure
A3 judgment. Thus, I am convinced that the findings in
Annexure A3 judgment should enure to the petitioner.
It would be a sheer waste of judicial time to conduct a
2025:KER:94317
trial all over again, especially in view of the findings in
Annexure A3 judgment. Thus, I am inclined to allow the
Crl.M.C by exercising the inherent powers of this Court
under Section 528 of BNSS.
In the aforesaid circumstances, Crl.M.C is
allowed, and consequently, Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure
A2 Final Report and all further proceedings in L.P. No.
1/2021 of the Trial Court, as against the petitioner
(Fasil), are quashed.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
Srs/05.12.25
2025:KER:94317
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10275 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 . A CERTIFIED COPY COPY OF THE FIR & FIS
IN CRIME NO.643/2016 OF KUTTIYADI POLICE
STATION DATED 18/07/2016
Annexure A2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET IN
SC 1137/2017 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT
(SUBORDINATE COURT) VADAKARA DATED
14/02/2017
Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT SC
1137/2016 DATED ON 31-01-2021 ON THE
FILES OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS
COURT(SUBORDINATE COURT)VADAKARA
