Dismissed

Velayduhan @ Udarappan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Jan 2010Crl.MC/27/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam dismissed a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings against the petitioner, a co-accused who had been absconding while others were acquitted. The Court held that acquittal of co-accused does not entitle the petitioner to quashing absent specific evidence against him.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings was dismissed.

Velayduhan @ Udarappan Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2010 / 24TH POUSHA 1931

¶4

Crl.MC.No. 27 of 2010() ----------------------------------(SC.NO.197/2009 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT,OTTAPALAM) .....

¶5

PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED:

¶6

-----------------------------------------

¶7

VELAYUDHAN @ UDARAPPAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.KUNHATHAN, MANGALATH MELETHIL HOUSE, THANEERKODE, OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. MR.P.JAYARAM

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT:

¶10

---------------------------------------------------

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶12

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALISSERY POLICE STATION, CHALISSERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶13

3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SHORNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶14

R1 TO R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A.SALIM

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Kss

¶17

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.

¶18

------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.27 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 14^th January 2010

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Petitioner is the second accused

¶21

in S.C.197/2009 on the file of Assistant

¶22

sessions court, Ottapalam. As the petitioner and other three accused were absconding, case as against them was split up and the remaining accused were tried. By Annexure-A18 judgment, learned Assistant Sessions Judge acquitted those accused. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case pending against the petitioner contending that in view of Annexure-A18 judgment, whereunder other accused were acquitted, in the absence of specific allegation as against the petitioner, even

¶23

Crmc 27/10 2

¶24

if petitioner is to be tried, it would only end in futility and in such circumstances, it is to be quashed.

¶25

petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶26

Though learned counsel relying on

¶27

the decision of the Apex court in Heera and

¶28

another v. State of Rajasthan (2007 (10) SCC 175) and relying on Annexure-A18 judgment acquitting other accused, argued that the case as against the petitioner can never end in conviction, even if petitioner is to be tried

¶29

and therefore, the proceedings is to be quashed, as held by the Full Bench of this court. Annexure-A18 judgment, whereunder the co-accused were acquitted can be looked into only to find out who are all parties therein and based on the acquittal under Annexure-A18,

¶30

Crmc 27/10 3

¶31

petitioner, the absconding accused is not entitled to get the proceedings quashed. Even though learned counsel wanted to rely on the evidence recorded as against the co-accused, and argued that as no test identification parade was conducted even if the witnesses are to be examined again there is no likelihood of a conviction, I cannot agree with the submission that based on the evidence against the other accused when no evidence was adduced against the petitioner, the case is to be quashed. It is for the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, on the evidence to decide whether there is evidence against the petitioner to convict him or not.

¶32

Petition is dismissed.

¶33

M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE.

¶34

uj.

¶35

Crmc 27/10 4

Velayduhan @ Udarappan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Velayduhan @ Udarappan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dipin K.V. Vs State of Kerala

D.Thankan Vs State of Kerala

Anilkumar Vs State of Kerala

Ambikuttan @ Ambili Vs State of Kerala

Kabeer Vs State of Kerala

Reghunath Vs State of Kerala