Allowed

Gireesh v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jun 2023Crl.MC/1559/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC, quashing criminal proceedings against the petitioner accused of rioting and affray. The Court held that the acquittal of co-accused and lack of usable evidence indicated the substratum of the case was lost, rendering a trial a futile exercise.

What did the court decide?

The Annexure-A9 final report and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner pending as C.P. No. 26/2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pattambi, are quashe

Gireesh Vs State of Kerala — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

THURSDAY,THE8THDAYOFJUNE2023/18THJYAISHTA,1945

¶5

CRL.MC NO. 1559 OF 2023

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTCP 26/2019 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS , PATTAMBI SC 1176/2019 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, OTTAPALAM

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

GIREESH
AGED33YEARS
S/OCHANDRASEKHARAN,
CHANDRALAYAM,POOVAKKODE,P.OMARUTHUR,
PATTAMBITALUK,PALAKKADDISTRICT,PIN-679306

¶9

BYADVS.
P.JAYARAM
P.B.AJOY
K.R.PAUL
ARJUNP.P.

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

STATEOFKERALA
REPRESENTEDBYPUBLICPROSECUTOR
HIGHCOURTOFKERALA,ERNAKULUM,PIN-682031

¶12

SRIPRASHANTHMPPP

¶13

THISCRIMINALMISC.CASEHAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
08.06.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYPASSEDTHEFOLLOWING:

¶14

CRL.MCNO.1559OF2023

¶15

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The instant petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“the Code”) for the sake of brevity.

¶18

The petitioner is the accused in CP No 26/2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the I Class, Pattambi. In the aforesaid case , he is accused of having committed offenses punishable under Sections 143,147,148, 341, 323, 324 and 308 r/w Section 149 of the IPC.

¶19

The aforesaid case has arisen from Crime No.22/2019 of the

¶20

Pattambi Police Station. In the final report submitted before the learned Magistrate, five persons were arrayed as accused. The petitioner herein was the 3rd accused.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that on 06.01.2019 at about 9.45

¶22

pm., the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their common object, committed the offense of rioting and thereafter wrongfully restrained the de facto complainant and attacked him causing injuries.

¶23

The petitioner was not available for trail and hence the case was proceeded against accused Nos.1, 2, 4 and 5. By judgment dated 31.08.2022 in S.C.No.1176/2019, they were found not guilty and were acquitted under Section

¶24

CRL.MCNO.1559OF2023

¶25

¶26

235(1) of the Cr.P.C. The case against the petitioner herein was refiled, and the same is now pending as C.P..No. 26/2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pattambi.

¶27

It is on the basis of the acquittal of the co-accused that this petition

¶28

is filed seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that the substratum of the case against the petitioner has been shattered.

¶29

Sri. Jayaram, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has relied on the judgments rendered by 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 v. State of Kerala [2013 KHC 177] and Ashraf Kancheriyil v. State of Kerala [2011 (2) KHC 812] and it was urged that the continuance of proceedings against the petitioner herein would serve no purpose.

¶30

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶31

I have gone through the Annexure-A1 judgment of acquittal

¶32

rendered by the Sessions Judge. The learned Sessions Judge, after meticulous analysis of the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against the accused and they were entitled to acquittal under Section 235(1) of the Code. As held by a three-Judge Bench

¶33

of this Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552),

¶34

CRL.MCNO.1559OF2023

¶35

¶36

though the reasoning of the judgment contained or appreciation of evidence in the case of a co-accused therein are not grounds to attract any relief under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a case where the substratum of the case is lost, is an exception to the above rule.

¶37

I am of the firm view that no purpose is going to be served by directing the petitioner herein to undergo the ordeal of a 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. Furthermore, no evidence of worth could be adduced by the prosecution during the previous trial. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that this Court will be well justified in invoking the powers under Section 482 of the Code and in quashing the proceedings.

¶38

Resultantly, this petition is allowed. Annexure-A9 final report in Crime No. 22 of 2019 of the Pattambi Police Station and all further proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now pending as C.P.No.26/2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Pattambi, are quashed.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶41

avs

¶42

CRL.MCNO.1559OF2023

¶43

¶44

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 1559/2023

¶45

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶46

`Annexure A1`	`CERTIFIED COPY THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2022 IN` `S.C NO. 1176/2019 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL` `SESSIONS JUDGE OTTAPPALAM`
`Annexure A2`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW1, UMMER N.T, AND DATE` `20.07.2021 IN S.C NO. 1176/2019 ON THE FILES OF` `ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A3`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW2, MUHHAMAD SHEREEF,` `DATED 29.07.2022 IN S.C NO 117/2019 ON THE FILES` `OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A4`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW3, ABDHUL SALEEM,` `DATED 29.07.2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL` `SESSIONS COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A5`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW4 DR. THOMAS JOSEPH,` `DATED 23.08.2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL` `SESSIONS COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A6`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW 5 UNNIKRISHNAN, DATED` `23.08.2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL SESSION` `COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A7`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW 6, JEEAVNI MICHAEL,` `DATED 23.08.2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL` `SESSION COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A8`	`COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW 7, BIJU N.P,` `DARTE23.08.2022 ON THE FILES OF ADDITIONAL` `SESSIONS COURT, OTTAPALAM`
`Annexure A9`	`COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 12.04.2019 FILED BY` `THE POLICE IN CRIME NO. 22/2019 OF PATTAMBI POLICE` `STATION`

Gireesh v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gireesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.R Prakash Vs State of Kerala

Salim.F, Vs State of Kerala

Shainu v K Vs State of Kerala

Joy Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Biju P.R. Vs Bijo James