Allowed

Kalesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC29 Nov 2016Crl.MC/5358/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of proceedings against the petitioner. Citing co-accused acquittal and lack of evidence, the court held trial would be futile under Section 482 CrPC and quashed the pending case (CC No. 690 of 2014).

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; proceedings C.C. No. 690 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, North Paravur quashed.

Kalesh Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 5358 of 2014 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CC 814/2004 of J.M.F.C. - I, NORTH PARAVUR DATED 07-03-2014

¶7

CRIME NO. 197/2004 OF BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION , ERNAKULAM

¶8

PETITIONER(S):

¶9

KALESH, AGED 35 S/O.KARTHIKEYAN, KARAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUPPATHADAM KARA, KADUNGALLUR VILLAGE.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.C.D.JOHNY SMT.MEREENA JOSEPH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 31. ON BEHALF OF SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BINANIPURAM POLICE STATION.

¶13

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. M.R.DHANIL

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

CONTD....

¶16

:2:

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 5358 of 2014 () ---------------------------

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------ANNEXURE A1. CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CC 814/2004 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT N.PARAVUR.

¶20

ANNEXURE A2. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CC 814/2004 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT N.PARAVUR DATED 7.3.14.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL

¶22

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

¶23

SKS

¶24

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J

¶25

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

¶26

Crl.M.C. No. 5358 of 2014

¶27

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

¶28

Dated this the 29^th day of November, 2016

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

1.The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No. 690 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, North Paravur. The aforesaid case has its origin in Crime No. 197 of 2004 of the Binanipuram Police Station. Final report was laid before the Jurisdictional Magistrate and cognizance was taken as C.C.No.814 of 2004. The petitioner was arrayed as the 9^th accused in the final report.

¶31

2.The petitioner had absconded and hence the case was proceeded against the accused Nos. 1 to 8 and 10. By Annexure A2 judgment dated 07.03.2014, rest of the accused were found not guilty of the offences and were acquitted of all charges.

¶32

3.It is based on the acquittal of the co-accused that this petition is preferred seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that the very edifice of the prosecution case has

¶33

Crl.M.C. No. 5358 of 2014 2

¶34

been shattered.

¶35

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶36

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, referring to the decisions of this Court in Moosa V Sub Inspector of Polic e 2006 (1) KLJ 349, Abbas T.K. V State of Kerala 2013 KHC 336, Jalalu Rajan and Anr V State of Kerala 2013 KHC 177 and Ashraf Kancheriyil V State of Kerala 2011 (2) KHC 812 contended that the continuance of proceedings against the petitioner would serve no purpose .

¶37

6.I have gone through Annexure-A1 final report and Annexure A2 judgment of acquittal rendered by the court below. The learned Magistrate had meticulously considered the evidence and came to the conclusion that the prosecution had miserably failed in establishing its case. The said judgment has attained finality.

¶38

Crl.M.C. No. 5358 of 2014

¶39

¶40

7.I am of the firm view that no purpose is going to be served by directing the petitioner to face the trial at this stage. It can only be a futile exercise and will only serve to waste precious judicial time which can be used for more productive work. The prospects of conviction is extremely remote as no evidence of worth could be adduced by the prosecution during the previous trial. This Court will be justified in quashing the proceedings under Section 482 of the Code .

¶41

In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1 final report and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as C.C. No. 690 of 2014 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, North Paravur are quashed .

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V.

JUDGE

SKS

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

Kalesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalesh 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

Benny Varghese Vs the State of Kerala

Mani Vs State of Kerala

Afsal Kalarikettiparambathu Vs the State of Kerala

Siddque Vs State of Kerala

Mukesh Vs State of Kerala

Noufal Vs State of Kerala