Allowed

V.K.Vivek v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Nov 2016Crl.MC/5470/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allotted a petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner. The court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings, holding that since co-accused were acquitted due to lack of evidence, the case substratum was lost, rendering further trial futile.

What did the court decide?

Annexure-A1 FIR and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner pending as S.C. No.585 of 2015 are quashed.

V.K.Vivek Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/16TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 5470 of 2016

¶6

SC 585/2015 OF ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT - IV, THALASSERY CP 48/2003 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT,THALASSERY CRIME NO. 185/2003 OF THALASSERY POLICE STATION

¶7

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

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

V.K.VIVEK, S/O.PREMRAJ, 44 YEARS, VISHNU NIVAS, THIRUVANGAD, KAVUMBHAGOM, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SMT.MINI.V.A.

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

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

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI T.R.RENJITH

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

K.V.

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 5470 of 2016 ()

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶19

----------------------ANNEXURE A1. TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE IN CRIME NO.185/2003 OF THALASSERY POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2. TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITIONS OF PWS 1, 2 AND 4 IN S.C.NO.760/2004 OF ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS COURT, THALASSERY. ANNEXURE A3. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.06.2015 IN S.C.NO.760/2004 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT IV, THALASSERY. ANNEXURE A4. TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.07.2016 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT IV, THALASSERY IN S.C.NO.585/2015 TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES NIL -----------------------

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

K.V.

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V, J

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.M.C. No.5470 of 2016

¶26

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

¶27

Dated this the 7^th day of November, 2016

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

1.The instant petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶30

2.The petitioner herein is the accused in S.C. No.585 of 2015 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-IV, Thalasserry. The aforesaid case has originated from Crime No.185 of 2003 registered by the Sub Inspector Thalassery Police Station alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 435, 427, 353 and 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC.

¶31

3.Final report was laid in the aforesaid crime arraying seven persons as the accused, the petitioner being the accused No 3 . The petitioner had absconding hence the case was proceeded against rest of the accused and by AnnexureA3 judgment dated 30.6.2015 in S.C.No 760 of 2004, they

¶32

Crl.M.C.5470/2016 2

¶33

were found not guilty and were acquitted of all charges.

¶34

4.It is on the basis of the acquittal of the co-accused that this petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that the substratum of the case has been shattered.

¶35

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶36

6.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, relying on 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] would submit that the continuance of proceedings against the petitioner would serve no purpose.

¶37

7.It is admitted by the learned Public prosecutor that Annexure A3 judgment of acquittal passed against the rest

¶38

Crl.M.C.5470/2016 3

¶39

of the accused has become final.

¶40

8.I have gone through Annexure-A1 FIR, Annexure-A2 depositions of the witnesses and Annexure-A3 judgment of the acquittal recorded by the learned Sessions Judge. It is borne out from Annexure-A3 judgment that the court below came to the conclusion that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove its case as the rest of the accused . It is also relevant to note that there was no clear or convincing evidence as regards the identity of the accused.

¶41

9.As held by a three Judge Bench of this Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552), though the reasoning of the judgment contained or appreciation of evidence in the case of a co-accused therein are not grounds to attract any relief under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a case where the substratum of the case is lost is an exception to the above rule.

¶42

Crl.M.C.5470/2016

¶43

¶44

10.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.

¶45

In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A1 FIR and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as S.C. No.585 of 2015 on the file of the

¶46

Additional Sessions Court-IV, Thalasserry are quashed.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V. JUDGE

¶49

vps

V.K.Vivek v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.K.Vivek 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

Thankamma Vs State of Kerala

Bhamakumari Amma Vs State of Kerala

Shihab Vs State of Kerala

Savithri Vijayan Vs State of Kerala

Kalader Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Rasheed Vs State of Kerala