Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

K. Ubais vs State Of Kerala on 31 January, 2017

Author: P.Ubaid

Bench: P.Ubaid

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        PRESENT:

                         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

            TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1940

                                 Crl.MC.No. 8524 of 2017
                     -----------------------------------------


                              CP 49/2011 of J.M.F.C.-II, KANNUR

                  CRIME NO. 105/2008 OF VALAPPATANAM POLICE STATION, KANNUR



PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 :-
---------------------------


    K. UBAIS, AGED 34 YEARS,
    S/O. HAMSA, KOMMATH HOUSE,
    KAMMADATH MOTTA,
    AROLI, PAPPINISSERY AMSOM.


   BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV
           SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN
           SRI.V.VINAY
           SRI.D.FEROZE


RESPONDENT :-
---------------

    STATE OF KERALA,
    REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
    HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
    ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031.
   (CRIME NO.105/2008 OF
    VALAPPATTANAM POLICE STATION,
    KANNUR DISTRICT)

    BY SMT.K.K.SHEEBA, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR


    THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-08-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 8524 of 2017 ()
--------------------------

                                      APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :-
----------------------------


ANNEXURE I        CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME
                  NO.105/2008 OF VALAPPATTANAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE II       TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.01.2017 OF
                  THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT,
                  THALASSERY IN SC NO.48/2012.

ANNEXURE III      CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW1
                  (GIREESH K.V.) IN S.C NO.48/2012.


RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES :-    NIL
--------------------------




                                                            //TRUE COPY//

                                                                  P.A. TO JUDGE

rkj

                         P.UBAID, J.
    ================================
             Crl.M.C.No.8524 of 2017
    ================================
        Dated this the 14th day of August, 2018

                          ORDER

The petitioner herein is the 4 th accused in S.C.No.48 of 2012 of the Court of Session, Thalassery involving the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 452, 323, 324, 326, 307 and 427 IPC. The accused Nos.1, 2, 5 to 10 and 12 obtained a judgment of acquittal under Section 232 Cr.P.C. from the trial court on 31.01.2017, when the material witnesses including the defacto complainant who sustained injuries in the alleged incident turned hostile during trial in view an amicable settlement made by the parties out of court. The case against the petitioner was split up and refiled at the committal stage itself when he remained consistently absent. It was re-filed as C.P.No.49 of 2011, and now the case stands transferred to the register of long pending cases as L.P.No.59 of 2012. The petitioner now seeks orders quashing the prosecution as against him on the ground that the very substratum of the prosecution case stands lost by the acquittal of the others, and that Crl.M.C.No.8524 of 2017 2 when the complainant himself has disowned the case, the prosecution cannot in any manner improve the case as against him.

2. Annexure-A2 is the judgment of the trial court in S.C.No.48 of 2012. The judgment shows that nobody including the defacto complainant supported the prosecution, and the settlement made by the parties out of court was also reported to Court. In the said case, the prosecution examined nine witnesses, and proved Ext.P1 document. The defacto complainant examined as PW1 stated that he had not in fact identified anybody who assaulted him, and he happened to make the Ext.P1 complaint on some misapprehension, or on the basis of what the others told him. Thus practically he disowned the complaint, and the other witnesses also turned hostile, supporting the versions of the complainant. In such a situation, the learned trial Judge acquitted the other accused under Section 232 Cr.P.C. finding that there is absolutely no material. On a perusal of the Annexure-2 judgment, I find that the very substratum of the case stands lost, and the prosecution cannot in any manner improve the case as against the petitioner. No doubt, the proceeding Crl.M.C.No.8524 of 2017 3 against him will be a sheer waste of time, when it is a fact that nobody would support the prosecution in view of the amicable settlement made the parties out of Court.

In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioner herein as the 4 th accused in Crime No.105 of 2008 of the Valappattanam Police Station now pending in L.P.No.59 of 2012 of the court below (Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Kannur) will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Sd/-

rkj                                    P.UBAID, JUDGE