Allowed

Sandeep v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Nov 2019Crl.MC/2477/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashes criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Court held that since a prior judgment acquitted accomplices after witnesses testified that no one inflicted injury, the prosecution case's substratum was lost against the remaining accused.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings under C.C.No.166/2012 against the petitioners in the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal were quashed.

Sandeep Vs State of Kerala — Quashing and FIR | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.2477 OF 2019(H)

¶6

C.C.NO.166/2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS

¶7

-II,ATTINGAL

¶8

CRIME NO.555/2006 OF Venjaramoodu Police Station , Thiruvananthapuram

¶9

PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 & 4:

¶10

1 SANDEEP AGED 38 YEARS

¶11

S/O.NANDAGOPAN, PLAMOODU VEEDU, MELATTUMOOZHI, VAMANAPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST.

¶12

2 MANILAL @ LALU, AGED 41 YEARS

¶13

S/O.PREMACHANDRAN, THOPPIL VEEDU, MELATTUMOOZHI, VAMANAPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR

¶15

RESPONDENTS/STATE & DE FACTO COMPLAINANT:

¶16

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶17

2 SURENDRAN, S/O.KUNJAN, BYJU VILASAM, THANNIPPARA, ANAKUDI MURI, VAMANAPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT695606.

¶18

SRI C S HRITHWIK-SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Crl.MC.No.2477 OF 2019(H) 2

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing the proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C.No.166/2012 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal.

¶23

Final report was filed by the police in Crime No.555/2006 of Venjarammoodu Police Station against six persons alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 324 and 326 IPC. Accused 2, 3 and 6 faced trial in the C.C.No.1453/2006 conducted by the learned Magistrate. The 5^th accused was dead at the time of the trial of the case. As per the judgment dated 24-02-2012 in C.C.No.1453/2006, learned Magistrate acquitted accused 2, 3 and 6 in the case for want of evidence. Petitioners, who were accused 1 and 4, had not appeared before the court during the trial of the case. The case against them was split up and re-filed as C.C.No.166/2012.

¶24

The petitioners have prayed for quashing the proceedings against them on the ground that by virtue of

¶25

Crl.MC.No.2477 OF 2019(H) 3

¶26

Annexure-A2 judgment passed by the learned Magistrate in C.C.No.1453/2006, the substratum of the prosecution case has been lost.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶28

On a perusal of Annexure-A2 judgment, it is seen that the three persons, who had sustained injury in the incident and who were the victims of the offences allegedly committed by the accused, had been examined as PW1 to PW3. All these witnesses had deposed before the trial court that nobody inflicted injury on them. The evidence given by these witnesses was not to the effect that the accused who appeared before the Court did not inflict any injury on them but to the effect that nobody inflicted any injury on them. Annexure-A2 judgment also shows that, after examination of the above mentioned three witnesses, the trial court acquitted the accused who faced the trial, without examining any other witnesses. The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submits that the State has not filed any appeal against Annexure-A2 judgment. In these

¶29

Crl.MC.No.2477 OF 2019(H) 4

¶30

circumstances, I am of the view that, by virtue AnnexureA2 judgment the substratum of the prosecution case has been lost. Therefore, the power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

¶31

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings against the petitioners in the case C.C.No.166/2012 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Attingal are hereby quashed.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶34

JUDGE

¶35

LEK

¶36

Crl.MC.No.2477 OF 2019(H) 5

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO.555/2006 OF VENJARAMMOODU POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.2.2012 IN C.C.NO.1453/2006 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT II, ATTINGAL.

Sandeep v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep 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

Kalidasan, Vs State of Kerala

Antoney Victor Vs State of Kerala

Soorya Hari.R.S Vs the State of Kerala

Prasad Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Jaffar K.A. @ Jappu Vs State of Kerala

V.P.Muhammed Haneefa Vs Assistant Labour Officer