Allowed

Siddique C.A. @ Aboobacker Siddique v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC15 Mar 2021Crl.MC/822/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition and quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.235 of 2020 against the petitioner-the third accused-whose co-accused were acquitted due to grossly inadequate prosecution evidence and hostile witnesses, deeming further trial futile.

What did the court decide?

proceedings in C.C.No.235 of 2020 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg, as against the petitioner/3rd accused is quashed.

Siddique C.A. @ Aboobacker Siddique Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

Crl.MC.No.822 OF 2021(C)

¶6

CC 235/2020 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -II,HOSDRUG CRIME NO.74/2015 OF Bekal Police Station , Kasargod

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

1 SIDDIQUE C.A. @ ABOOBACKER SIDDIQUE AGED 30 YEARS S/O. ABDULLA, NEAR CHEMBARIKA ALI MUBARAK MANZIL, CHANDHRAGIRI P.O., KALANAD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD, PIN-671317.

¶9

*** [DELETED] THE FIRST PETITIONER IS DELETED AS PER THE ORDER IN CRL.M.APPL.NO.2/2021 DATED 15.03.2021.**

¶10

2 MUHAMMED NIZAMUDHEEN C.M., AGED 27 YEARS MUHAMMED SHEREIF C.M., NIBRASDIN MANZIL, KALLAM VALLAPP, CHEMBARIKA, KALNAD VILLAGE, KASARAGOD671319.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.RAHUL SASI SMT.NEETHU PREM SHRI.VIVEK.P.K

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

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

¶14

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BAKEL POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671318.

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

PP T.R.RENJITH

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Crl.MC.No.822 OF 2021(C)

¶19

-2-

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Dated this the 15^th day of March, 2021

¶22

Petitioner is the third accused in Crime No. 74 of 2015 registered at the Bekal Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 324 r/w 149 of IPC. On submission of the final report, the case committed to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg

¶23

and numbered as C.C.No.601 of 2015.

¶24

Petitioner/third accused did not appear during trial of the case, which ended in the acquittal of accused Nos.1, 4 and 5, finding the prosecution to have failed in proving the charge against the accused. The petitioner being absent, the case against him was split up and refiled as C.C.No.235 of 2020. The prayer in this Crl.M.C. is to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.235 of 2020

¶25

Crl.MC.No.822 OF 2021(C)

¶26

-3-

¶27

of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg, in view of acquittal of the co-accused as per Annexure A2 judgment.

¶28

3. Perusal of Annexure A2 shows that, after careful evaluation of the prosecution evidence, the learned Magistrate had come to the definite conclusion of the evidence tendered by the prosecution being grossly inadequate to prove the guilt of the accused. The substratum of the prosecution evidence having thus been lost and the de facto complainant/injured witness having turned hostile, the trial court acquitted the accused.

¶29

4. In such circumstances, I find substance in the contention that no purpose will be served by the petitioner/3^rd accused being compelled to face trial, since it will only be a futile exercise, resulting in waste of precious judicial

¶30

Crl.MC.No.822 OF 2021(C)

¶31

time. As such, there is no even a remote possibility of the petitioner being convicted and hence, further proceedings in the case amounts to an abuse of process.

¶32

In the result, the Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.235 of 2020 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg, as against the petitioner/3^rd accused is quashed.

¶33

It is made clear that this order does not interdict the trial court from continuing the proceedings against the 2^nd accused.

¶34

Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE

¶35

Scl/15.03.2021

¶36

Crl.MC.No.822 OF 2021(C)

¶37

-5-

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

ANNEXURE A1	THE CERTIFIED	COPY	OF THE FINAL REPORT IN
	CRIME NO.74 OF	2015	OF BAKEL POLICE
	STATION.
ANNEXURE A2	THE CERTIFIED	COPY	OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
	7.7.2017 IN C.	C.NO.	601 OF 2015 OF JUDICIAL
	FIRST CLASS MA	GISTR	ATE COURT-II, HOSDURG.

Siddique C.A. @ Aboobacker Siddique v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siddique C.A. @ Aboobacker Siddique 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.G. Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Vs State of Kerala

Yusaf P.A. Vs State of Kerala

Vineesh Gopinath Vs the State of Kerala

Asif Aslam Vs State of Kerala

Shibu Vs State of Kerala

Sajin Vs State of Kerala