Allowed

Dinesan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Oct 2019Crl.MC/3949/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On an application to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the High Court held that since the prosecution failed to prove an unlawful assembly, the basis for convicting the petitioner was lost. Continuing the trial would serve no useful purpose given no chance of conviction existed. The proceedings against the fifth accused were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings against the petitioner based on the final report in Crime No.147/1999 were quashed.

Dinesan 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

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 22ND ASWINA, 1941

¶5

Crl.MC.No.3949 OF 2019(C)

¶6

SC NO.77/2000 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)FAST TRACK-I, MANJERI

¶7

CP NO.27/1999 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, PONNANI CRIME NO.147/1999 OF Changaramkulam Police Station , Malappuram

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5:

¶9

DINESAN AGED 46 YEARS S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR, PATTATH HOUSE, PALLIKKARA AMSOM DESOM.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU (SR.) SRI.AJEESH K.SASI SRI.P.M.RAFIQ SRI.THOMAS J.ANAKKALLUNKAL SRI.V.C.SARATH SRI.VIPIN NARAYAN SMT.POOJA PANKAJ SRUTHY N. BHAT

¶11

RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSPECTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.

¶13

SRI C S HRITHWIK-SR PP

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-102019, THE COURT ON 14-10-2019 PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Crl.M.C.No.3949 of 2019

¶16

¶17

R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, J

¶18

************************ Crl.M.C.No.3949 of 2019

¶19

Dated this the 14^th day of October, 2019

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This is an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing

¶22

the proceedings against the petitioner in the case L.P.No.12/2004 arising out of S.C.No.77/2000 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court-I, Manjeri.

¶23

The petitioner is the fifth accused in the case. There were total 20 accused in the case which was originally numbered as S.C.No.77/2000. During the trial of that case, the petitioner, who was the fifth accused, and the tenth accused did not appear. The third accused had died during the pendency of the trial. The case against accused Nos.5 and 10, who were absconding, was split up. Subsequently, the case against the petitioner was entered into the register of long pending cases as L.P.No.12/2004.

¶24

The prosecution case is that, on 30.09.1999, at about 18.45 hours, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the common object of such assembly, they attacked the de facto complainant with deadly weapons and

¶25

Crl.M.C.No.3949 of 2019

¶26

¶27

made attempt to murder him.

¶28

As per the judgment dated 22.04.2004 in S.C.No.77/2000, the trial court found all the accused, except accused Nos.3, 5 and 10, guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324 and 326 read with 149 I.P.C. The trial court found them not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C and acquitted them in respect of that offence.

¶29

The persons who were convicted by the trial court in S.C.No.77/2000 filed Crl.A.No.727/2004 before this Court. As per the judgment dated 12.12.2018 in Crl.A.No.727/2004, this Court found that the prosecution failed to prove any unlawful assembly and therefore, acquitted the appellants of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 148 I.P.C. This Court confirmed the conviction of accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 I.P.C with the aid of Section 34 I.P.C. The remaining appellants were found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 read with 149 I.P.C.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, by virtue of the judgment of this Court in Crl.A.No.727/2004, the edifice or the substratum of the prosecution case is lost and therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed.

¶31

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶32

Crl.M.C.No.3949 of 2019

¶33

¶34

Public Prosecutor.

¶35

There is no merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the entire edifice or the substratum of the prosecution case has been lost by virtue of the judgment of this Court in Crl.A.No.727/2004. This Court has found accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 in the case guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 read with 34 I.P.C. The substratum of the prosecution case has been lost only with respect to the allegation that there was an unlawful assembly of persons.

¶36

There is a clear finding made by this Court in the judgment in Crl.A.No.727/2004 that the prosecution failed to prove unlawful assembly. It was for this reason, this Court acquitted the appellants, except accused Nos.1, 2 and 4, of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 148 I.P.C and also found that they cannot be convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 I.P.C with the aid of Section 149 I.P.C. There is also a specific finding made by this Court in the aforesaid appeal that the material witnesses in the case had given evidence during the trial of the case only against accused Nos.1 to 4.

¶37

In the aforesaid circumstances, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner, who is accused No.5, would serve no useful purpose. There is not even a remote chance of conviction

¶38

Crl.M.C.No.3949 of 2019

¶39

¶40

against him. Continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would result only in loss of the precious time of the trial court which may be flooded with cases. In these circumstances, I find that the power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

¶41

Consequently, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings against the petitioner, based on the final report filed in Crime No.147/1999 of Changaramkulam police station, are hereby quashed.

¶42

Sd/- R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE

¶43

jsr/11/10/2019

¶44

Crl.M.C.No.3949 of 2019

¶45

¶46

APPENDIX

¶47

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶48

ANNEXURE A	TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 147/1999 OF CHANGARAMKULAM POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
ANNEXURE B	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.4.2004 IN S.C. NO. 77 OF 2000 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE ADHOC FAST TRACK COURT-1, MANJERI.
ANNEXURE C	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN S.C. NO. 124 OF 2008 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE ADHOC-1, MANJERI DATED 28.3.2009 PERTAINING TO THE ORIGINAL 10TH ACCUSED AS PER THE FINAL REPORT.
ANNEXURE D	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.12.2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 727 OF 2004 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

¶49

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶50

TRUE COPY

¶51

P.A TO JUDGE

¶52

LSN

Dinesan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesan 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

Muhammed Shafeeque Kunnoor, Vs Joint Commissioner of Customs

Riyas Vs the State of Kerala

R.Jaikrishnan@Jaikrishnan Nair.R Vs Mr. Praveen Kumar.G

Yesodharankrishnan Vs State of Kerala

Akshay, Vs the State of Kerala

Aravind.B.T., Vs State of Kerala