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 1, Cited by 3]

Kerala High Court

Ibrahim @ Imbayi vs State Of Kerala on 4 August, 2010

Author: V.Ramkumar

Bench: V.Ramkumar

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 3097 of 2010()


1. IBRAHIM @ IMBAYI, S/O.HAMZA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :04/08/2010

 O R D E R
                      V. RAMKUMAR, J.
                  = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                    Crl.M.C..No.3097 of 200
                  = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
             Dated this the 4th day of August, 2010

                             ORDER

Petitioner, who is the 3rd accused in Crime No.458/2006 of Palakkad Town North Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 420 read with 34 IPC and now pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palakkad as C.C.No.115/2008 and transferred to Long Pending Register as L.P.No.81/2008 seeks to quash the proceedings against him mainly on the ground that co- accused in the case have been acquitted after trial in C.C.No.2/2008.

In the light of the decision in Moosa Vs.Sub Inspector of Police ( 2006(1) KLT 552), it is not permissible for this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner without a trial mainly for the reason that the co-accused have been acquitted. I am, however, inclined to permit the petitioner to plead for a discharge in C.C.No.115/2008 and also highlight the fact of acquittal of the co-accused before the Magistrate. I am also inclined to permit the petitioner to plead for a discharge in absentia. Accordingly if the petitioner file an application for Crl. M.C. No. 3097 of 2010 2 discharge before the court below through his counsel, that court shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioner for the disposal of the discharge petition. It shall be open to the petitioner to highlight the fact that the co-accused in the case have been acquitted after trial.

This Crl.M.C is disposed of reserving the above right of the petitioner.

Dated this the 4th day of August, 2010.

V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj