[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Abdul Jaleel P vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
2026:KER:4598
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 30TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 10768 OF 2025
CRIME NO.566/2012 OF Perambra Police Station, Kozhikode
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.575 OF 2015 OF
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT II/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY III,
KOZHIKODE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 5:
ABDUL JALEEL P
AGED 34 YEARS
S/O MOIDU KELOTH HOUSE, PALERY,
MUTHUVANNACHA P.O,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT., PIN - 673508
BY ADVS.
SHRI.NAJAH EBRAHIM V.P.
SHRI.MUHAMMAD SABITH
SMT.HANANA FATHIMA
RESPONDENTS/STATE/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 RAJEESH K
AGED 45 YEARS
S/O BALAKRISHNAN, MADATHIL MEETHAL HOUSE,
KALLODE, ERAVATTUR VILLAGE, KALLANODE P O,
PERAMBRA, KOZHIKODE, KERALA., PIN - 673615
3 RAJESH K M
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O KUNJIKRISHNAN, KANJIDIYATH MEETHAL HOUSE,
KALLODE, KALLANODE P O, ERAVATTUR, PERAMBRA,
KOZHIKODE, KERALA., PIN - 673615
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 2
2026:KER:4598
OTHER PRESENT:
SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR- SMT.SREEJA V
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 3
2026:KER:4598
Dated this the 20th day of January, 2026
ORDER
The petitioner is originally the fifth accused in
Crime No. 566/2012 registered by the Perambra Police
Station, Kozhikode District, against the six accused
persons, for allegedly committing offences punishable
under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324 and 307 read
with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and is now
pending consideration as S.C. No. 575/2015 on the files
of the Court of the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge-II,
Kozhikode ('Trial Court', for short).
2. The crux of the prosecution case is that;
On 11.09.2012, at around 22:45 hours, the
accused persons, in prosecution of their common
intention, had attacked PW1, out of their previous
animosity, with deadly weapons and caused grievous
hurt to him, with an intention to murder him.
Subsequently, the accused also restrained the PWs 1 and
2026:KER:4598
2 and assaulted them with iron rods and sticks. Thus, the
accused have committed the above offences.
3. The petitioner has stated in the Criminal
Miscellaneous Case that, he did not receive any
summons from Trial Court. Accordingly, the Trial Court
split up the case against the petitioner and proceeded
with the trial as against the accused 1, 2 and 4 as S.C.
No. 265/2014. By Annexure A3 judgment, the Trial Court
found the above accused persons guilty of the offences
under Sections 143, 148 and 324 read with Section 149
of the IPC, and convicted and sentenced them.
Nonetheless, the above accused persons were not found
guilty for the offences under Sections 147, 341 and 307
of the IPC. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence in
Annexure A3 judgment, the accused 1 and 3 preferred
Crl.Appl.No. 301/2018 before the Court of Sessions,
Kozhikode ('Appellate Court, for brevity). By Annexure
A4 judgment, the Appellate Court allowed the above
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 5
2026:KER:4598
appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence against
the accused 1 and 3. The second accused also preferred
a similar appeal, and the sentence and the conviction
imposed against him were also set aside. By the passing
of Annexure A4 judgment, the substratum of the
prosecution case has been lost. Therefore, even if the
petitioner withstands the ordeal of trial, it is not going to
yield a different result than Annexure A4 judgment.
Hence, all further proceedings in S.C. No. 575/2015, as
against the petitioner, may be quashed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. Crime No. 566/2012 was registered by the
Perambra Police Station against the six accused persons
for allegedly committing the above offences. It is
undisputed that the petitioner did not withstand the trial.
Accordingly, the case against him was split up, and
accused 1, 2 and 4 withstood the trial.
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 6
2026:KER:4598
6. By Annexure A4 judgment, the Appellate
Court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that the accused 1 and 3 had
committed the above offences. Accordingly, the
Appellate Court gave the benefit of the doubt to the
above accused persons and set aside the conviction and
the sentence imposed on them by 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
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
Annexures A1 FIR and Annexure A2 final report, and the
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 7
2026:KER:4598
findings in Annexure A4 judgment of the Appellate
Court.
9. A reading of the findings in the Annexure A4
judgment clearly substantiates that the prosecution has
miserably failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that
the above accused persons have committed the above
offences.
10. In light of the findings in Annexure A4
judgment, I am satisfied that the substratum of the
prosecution case has been lost. The said findings are
squarely applicable to the petitioner also. I am definite
that, even if the petitioner undergoes the ordeal of the
trial, it would not yield a different result than Annexure
A4 judgment. Thus, I am convinced that the findings in
Annexure A4 judgment should enure to the benefit of the
petitioner also. Therefore, in exercise of the inherent
powers of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, I am inclined to allow
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 8
2026:KER:4598
the Crl.M.C.
In the afore said circumstances, I allow the
Crl.M.C, by quashing Annexure A1 FIR, Annexure A2
Final Report and all further proceedings in S.C. No.
575/2015 on the file of the Trial Court, as against the
petitioner.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
mtk/
CRL.MC NO. 10768 of 2025 9
2026:KER:4598
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 10768 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.566/2012 OF PERAMBRA POLICE STATION
DATED 12.09.2012 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND
MARKED AS ANNEXURE A1
Annexure A2 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
CHARGE SHEET NO. 440/2013 DATED
30.03.2013 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND
MARKED AS ANNEXURE A2
Annexure A3 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE
II ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS JUDGE,
KOZHIKODE DATED 31.08.2018 IS PRODUCED
HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE A3
Annexure A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE CRL.
APPEAL NO. 301 OF 2018 BY THE HON'BLE
SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED
30.12.2019 IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND
MARKED AS ANNEXURE A4
