Dismissed

Saji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Aug 2018Crl.MC/4425/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Revision petitioner, third accused in excise case, sought to quash proceedings claiming acquittal of first accused deprived him of implication. Court rejected submission as first accused was arraigned solely on co-accused statements and no liquor seized from him.

What did the court decide?

Application seeking orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing the prosecution against the petitioner is dismissed.

Saji Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1940

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 4425 of 2018

¶6

SC 434/2004 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT - III, MAVELIKKARA

¶7

CRIME NO. 65/2001 OF MAVELIKKARA EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA

¶8

PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED :-

¶9

SAJI, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.SADANANDAN, SAJI BHAVANAM, KAITHAVADAKKUMURI, KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA-690 106.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN

¶11

SRI.P.R.VIBHU SMT.NIDHI RAVINDRAN SRI.M.YOHANNAN SRI.D.THILAKAN SMT.VIDYA G NAIR

¶12

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :-

¶13

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

¶14

BY SRI.C.K.PRASAD, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-08-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 4425 of 2018 ()

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONE ---------	R(S)' -----	EXHIBITS :- -------------
ANNEXURE	1	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE MAHAZAR DATED 23.8.2001.
ANNEXURE	2	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT IN CRIME NO.65/2001 OF THE MAVELIKKARA EXCISE RANGE DATED 23.08.2011.
ANNEXURE	3	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT BEFORE THE JFCM, MAVELIKKARA DATED 12.4.2003.
ANNEXURE	4	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW3 GOPALAKRISHNAPILLAI IN SC NO.434/2004 DATED 11.11.2009.
ANNEXURE	5	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW4 BINUKUMAR IN SC NO.434/2004 DATED 11.11.2009.
ANNEXURE	6	THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN SC NO.434/2004 DATED 11.11.2009 OF THE ADDL.SESSIONS COURT - FAST TRACK (ADHOC), MAVELIKKARA [ADDL.SESSIONS COURT-III, MAVELIKKARA].

¶19

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS :- NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

rkj

P.UBAID, J.

================================

¶25

Crl.M.C.No.4425 of 2018

¶26

================================ Dated this the 3^rd day of August, 2018

¶27

ORDER

¶28

The petitioner herein is the third accused in

¶29

Crime No.65 of 2001 of the Mavelikkara Excise Range. The case as against the accused Nos.1 and 2 was first committed to the Court of Session, and the case against the third accused was split up at the committal stage itself. The case against the accused Nos.1 and 2 was filed in the Court of Session as S.C.No.434 of 2004, but during trial the second accused absconded. In such a circumstance, the trial in S.C.No.434/2004 proceeded as against the first accused, and after full trial the first accused obtained a judgment of acquittal on 11.11.2009. The case against the third accused was later committed to the Court of Session, and it is now pending as S.C.No.345/2014 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Mavelikkara. The third accused now seeks orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing the prosecution as against him on the ground

¶30

Crl.M.C.No.4425 of 2018

¶31

¶32

that the very substratum of the prosecution case stands totally lost by the acquittal of the first accused by the trial court.

¶33

On hearing both sides, and on a perusal of the Annexure-6 judgment, I find no substance in the contentions raised by the petitioner. Annexure-6 judgment, and also the final report in this case, will show that the prosecution case is that the contraband article was seized from the possession of the accused Nos.2 and 3. The petitioner is the third accused. The first accused happened to be arraigned as accused simply on the basis of the statements given by the accused Nos.2 and 3. On trial, the trial court found that there is no material as against the first accused, except the statements given by the co-accused, and in the absence of anything to show that any quantity of liquor was seized from the possession of the first accused, or in the absence of any material to show his complicity with the others, the trial court acquitted the first accused on 11.11.2009. No doubt, the accused Nos.2 and 3 will not get the benefit of the said acquittal. There is no

¶34

Crl.M.C.No.4425 of 2018

¶35

¶36

allegation that any quantity of liquor was seized from his possession. In such a situation, the judgment of acquittal in favour of the first accused will not in any manner go to the benefit of the third accused. On the ground of such an acquittal, the third accused cannot seek orders quashing the prosecution as against him.

¶37

In the result, this application is dismissed.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

rkj P.UBAID, JUDGE

Saji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saji 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishnan Kutty Nair Vs the State of Kerala

Manikandan Vs State of Kerala

Vincent Vs State of Kerala

Jaijo Vs State of Kerala

N.Veluswamy Vs State

Charly George Vs the National Small Industries Corpn.Ltd