Allowed

S.v.Musthafa v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC10 Nov 2016Crl.MC/6058/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking to quash proceedings under Section 482 CrPC. After co-accused were acquitted due to lack of evidence and the injured witness's absence, the Court held that further trial was a futile waste of judicial time and prospects of conviction were minimal.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed. Proceedings under LPC No. 79/2008 are quashed.

S.v.Musthafa 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

THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/19TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 6058 of 2014 ()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN LPC 79/2008 of J.M.F.C.,PAYYANNUR DATED

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

S.V.MUSTHAFA S/O ABDULLA, AGED 36 YRS, VALIYA KADAPPURAM, PALAKKODE, RAMANTHALI AMSOM, PALAKKODE KANNUR - 670 306

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD SRI.JOLLY GEORGE

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

STATE OF KERALA (SUB INSEPECTOR OF POLICE, PAYYANGADI POLICE STATION\ CRIME NO. 494 OF 2003) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶12

MOHAMMAD SHUBAIB, S/O SULAIMAN, AGED 36 PALLITHARAMMEL ANGADIPPURAYIL MADAYI AMSOM, KOZHI BAZAAR PAYANGADI P.O. KANNUR DISTRICT 670 303

¶13

R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI. T.R.RENJITH

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

CONTD..

¶16

:2:

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 6058 of 2014 ()

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS :

¶20

ANNEXURE- A1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR/FIS DATED 26.11.2003 ON THE FILE OF THE JFMC, PAYYANNUR

¶21

ANNEXURE A2TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET NO. 197 OF 2003 FILED AGAINST THE ACCUSED 1 TO 5 INCLUDING THE PETITIONER

¶22

ANNEXURE A3 -TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.07.2007 IN C.C. NO. 325 OF 2004 PASSED BY THE LEARNED JFMC, PAYYANNUR.

¶23

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

SKS

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V., J

¶28

- - - - Crl.M.C. No. 6058 of 2014

¶29

- - - - Dated 10^th November, 2016

¶30

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

1.This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Code') has been preferred by the petitioner herein, who is the accused in L.P. No. 79 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur. The aforesaid case has originated from Crime No. 454 of 2007 of the Pazhayangadi Police Station.

¶33

2.The case was taken cognizance of the court below as C.C.No.325 of 2004. The petitioner was the 5^th accused. The petitioner was not available for trial and hence the case was proceeded with as against accused Nos. 1 to 4. By Annexure-A3 judgment dated 23.07.2007, the accused were found not guilty of the offence and were acquitted of

¶34

Crl.M.C. No. 6058 of 2014

¶35

¶36

all charges.

¶37

3.This petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that the very edifice of the prosecution case has been shattered in view of the acquittal of the coaccused.

¶38

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

¶39

5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on the decisions of this Court in Moosa V Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLJ 349), Abbas T.K. V State of Kerala (2013 KHC 336) , Jalalu Rajan and Anr

¶40

V State of Kerala (2013 KHC 177) and Ashraf Kancheriyil V State of Kerala (2011 (2) KHC 812) to contend that continuance of proceedings against the petitioner would serve no purpose.

¶41

6.I have gone through the Annexure-A2 final report and Annexure-A3 judgment of acquittal rendered by the court

¶42

Crl.M.C. No. 6058 of 2014

¶43

¶44

below. The learned Magistrate, after exhaustively considering the entire evidence, came to the conclusion that there was no material to establish the case against the accused. The injured witness did not even appear before court though coercive steps were initiated against him.

¶45

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 .

¶46

In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A2 final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against

¶47

Crl.M.C. No. 6058 of 2014

¶48

¶49

the petitioner now pending as L.P.C.. No. 79 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Payyannur are quashed .

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN.V.,

¶52