Saturday, 16, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mukesh vs State Of Kerala
2026 Latest Caselaw 2657 Ker

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2657 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Mukesh vs State Of Kerala on 7 April, 2026

Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026              1                2026:KER:30903

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

    TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1948

                      CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026

        CRIME NO.634/2013 OF Balaramapuram Police Station,

                         Thiruvananthapuram

        AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.1786 OF 2025 OF

ASSISTANT     SESSIONS    COURT/IST      ADDITIONAL    SUB    COURT,

NEYYATTINKARA

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 27 :

            MUKESH,
            AGED 34 YEARS
            S/O MANIKANTAN,BHARANIYATHU MELE PUTHUVAL PUTHEN
            VEEDU,PUNNAKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695126


            BY ADVS.
            SRI.M.R.SASITH
            SMT.R.K.CHIRUTHA
            SMT.ANJANA SURESH.E
            SMT.REETHU JACOB
            SMT.HASNA JABIL
            SMT.ANJITHA S.
            SMT.PRAGATHY PREM NAIR
            SMT.MEERA NAIR.I.P
            SMT.ANN GINI ROY




RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT :

    1       STATE OF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC
            PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN -
            682031
 CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026         2                2026:KER:30903

    2     SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
          BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN
          - 695501

    3     SATHI,
          S/O SELVESTER, KONATTUVILA PUTHUVAL
          PUTHENVEEDU,THALAYAL, ATHIYANOOR
          VILLAGE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695123


          PP.SRI.M.P.PRASANTH


     THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026             3                   2026:KER:30903

                             C.S.DIAS, J.
                 ---------------------------------------
                    CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026
         ------------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 7th day of April, 2026

                               ORDER

The petitioner is the original accused No.27 in

Crime No.634/2013 registered by the Balaramapuram

Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram, alleging the

commission of the offences punishable under Sections

143, 147, 148, 324, 353, 506(ii) and 307 read with

Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section

27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The case against the

petitioner was split up and the Assistant Sessions

Court, Neyyattinkara, ('Trial Court', in short) had

proceeded with the trial as against the accused 1 to 5,

7, 10 to 14, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 28. By

Annexure A3 judgment, the Trial Court acquitted the

said accused persons. Subsequently, the petitioner got

himself enlarged on bail and the case stands posted to CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026 4 2026:KER:30903

11.08.2026 before the Trial Court.

3. The petitioner has stated in the criminal

miscellaneous case that, in view of Annexure A3

judgment, the substratum of the prosecution case has

been lost. Therefore, even if the petitioner withstands

the ordeal of trial its not going to lead to a conviction.

Moreover, by Annexure A4 order, this Court has

quashed the proceedings as against the accused Nos. 9

and 24 in view of Annexure A3 judgment. Hence, the

petitioner is also entitled to the benefit of a similar

order.

4. The crux of the prosecution case is that, on

03.07.2013, the accused persons, in prosecution of

their common intention, had formed an unlawful

assembly and as per the instructions of the 1st accused,

they attacked CW1 with deadly weapons and caused

hurt to him. Thus, the accused have committed the

above offences.

CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:30903

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the

petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. Admittedly, the case against the petitioner was

split up and the Trial Court proceeded with the trial as

against the accused Nos. 1 to 5, 7, 10 to 14, 16, 17, 19,

21, 22, 25, 26 and 28. By Annexure A3 judgment the

Trial Court had acquitted the above accused persons

since the prosecution has failed to prove beyond

reasonable doubt that the accused persons have

committed the above offences. Subsequently, by

Annexure A4 order, this Court quashed the proceedings

against accused Nos. 9 and 24, in view of the findings

in Annexure A3 judgment.

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 CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:30903

repeatedly reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and

this Court in a catena of precedents.

8. I have carefully gone through the allegations in

Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2 final report and the findings

in Annexure A3 judgment.

9. In Annexure A3 judgment, the Trial Court, after

analysing the oral testimonies of the witnesses and the

materials on record, concluded that the witnesses had not

identified the accused persons. Moreover, there was no

material to substantiate the culpability of the accused

persons in the crime. Accordingly, the Trial Court held that

the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable

doubt that the accused persons had committed the above

offences.

10. In light of the findings in Annexure A3 judgment, I

am satisfied that the substratum of the prosecution case

has been lost. Therefore, even if the petitioner withstands

the ordeal of trial, its not going to lead to a conviction. It

would be a sheer waste of judicial time to conduct the trial

all over again against the petitioner. Thus, I am satisfied CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:30903

that this is a fit case to exercise of the inherent powers of

this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

In the aforesaid circumstances, I allow the Crl.M.C., by

quashing Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2 final report and

all further proceedings as against the petitioner in the

renumbered case (earlier number S.C.No.658/2017).

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS,JUDGE

SCB/07.04.26.

CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026 8 2026:KER:30903

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 1866 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure-A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO 634/2013 DATED 04-07-2013 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION.

Annexure-A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO 634/2013 OF BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION DATED 04-07-2015.

Annexure-A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 10-04- 2025 IN SC NO 658/2017 OF THE ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT, NEYYATINKARA IN CRIME NO 634/2013 OF THE BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION.

Annexure-A4 TRUE COPY OF JUDGEMENT IN CRL . MC NO 8849/2025 DATED 27/10/2025 BY HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter