SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

P.P.Prakashan vs P.P.Sreepriya on 15 November, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1940

Crl.MC.No. 5318 of 2018

CC 1442/2017 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KANNUR

CRIME NO. 1363/2016 OF VALAPPATTANAM POLICE STATION, KANNUR

PETITIONER/5TH ACCUSED:

P.P.PRAKASHAN,
AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. NANU, KULANGARATH HOUSE,
MEPPAYIL, PACHAKKARI MUKKU, VADAKKARA, KOZHIKODE
DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI.ADITHYA RAJEEV
SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN
SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR

RESPONDENTS/DE FACTO COMPLAINANT STATE:

1 P.P.SREEPRIYA,
D/O. P.P RAMACHANDRAN, PACHERI HOUSE, ALAVIL P.O,
KANNUR DISTRICT – PIN – 670 008.

2 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF
KERALA,ERNAKULAM, KOCHI – 682 031.

R2 BY SRI C M KAMAPPU, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.11.2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 5318 of 2018 2

ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner herein is the accused in C.C.No.1442 of

2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II,

Kannur. The aforesaid case has originated from Crime No.1363 of

2016 registered by the Valapattanam Police Station alleging offences

punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC.

3. As many as five persons were arrayed as the accused in

the final report and the petitioner was the 5 th accused. The

petitioner absconded and was not available for trial. Case against

accused Nos. 1 to 4 were proceeded with and by Annexure-VI

judgment dated 31.10.2017, they were found not guilty of the

offence and were acquitted of all charges.

4. It is on the basis of the acquittal of the co-accused that

this petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground

that the substratum of the case as against the petitioner has been

shattered.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the

learned Public Prosecutor.

Crl.MC.No. 5318 of 2018 3

6. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, relying on

the decisions of 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]

would submit that the continuance of proceedings against the

petitioner would serve no purpose.

7. I have gone through Annexure-II final report, Annexure-III

deposition of the victim and Annexure-VI judgment of acquittal

rendered by the court below. In her evidence, the de facto

complainant stated that none of the accused had subjected her to

cruelty. The court below held that there was no evidence to connect

any of the accused with the crime and the accused were acquitted

under Section 232 of the Code.

8. As held by a three Judge Bench of this Court in Moosa v.

Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552), 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.
Crl.MC.No. 5318 of 2018 4

9. I am of the firm view that no purpose is going to be served

by directing the petitioner to face the 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. The prospects of

conviction is extremely bleak as no evidence of worth could be

adduced by the prosecution during the previous trial. This Court will

be justified in quashing the proceedings under Section 482 of the

Code.

In the result, this petition is allowed. Annexure-II final report

and all proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner now

pending as C.C.No.1442 of 2017 on the file of the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-II, Kannur are quashed.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE

DSV/- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
Crl.MC.No. 5318 of 2018 5

APPENDIX
PETITIONER’S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I A TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT

DATED 23-06-2016 IN CRIME NO. 1363/2016 OF
THE VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE II A TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT DATED 02-09-

2016 IN CRIME NO. 1363 OF 2016 OF THE
VALAPATTANAM POLICE STATION.

ANNEXURE III A TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW1(DEFACTO
COMPLAINANT) DATED 27-10-2017.

ANNEXURE IV A TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW2(FATHER
OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT) DATED 27-10-
2017.

ANNEXURE V A TRUE COPY OF THE DEPOSITION OF PW3(MOTHER
OF THE DEFACTO COMPLAINANT).

ANNEXURE VI A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CC NO. 2153
OF 2016 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-II, KANNUR DATED 31-10-
2017.

ANNEXURE VII A TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT MEMO FILED BY SRI.

KALESH AND SMT. SREEPRIYA IN M.O.P NO.3/2016
DATED 07-04-2017.

ANNEXURE VIII A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
10-4-2017 IN M.O.P NO.3/2016 OF THE
SUBORDINATE JUDGE, MAHE.

RESPONDENT’S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//
Crl.MC.No. 5318 of 2018 6

P.A.TO JUDGE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh