IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2011 / 18TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1665 of 2011() ------------------------ CRIME NO. 252/2005 OF NILESHWAR POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD .................................... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO. 8 : --------------------------------------------- NAVAS P, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.L.B.ABDULLA, KOTTAPPURAM, NILESWHAR VILLAGE, KASARGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------------------ THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J. MOHAMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.1665 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 08th day of June, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner is the 8th accused in Crime No.252 of 2005 of Nileshwar Police Station. He, along with 8 others was charge- sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148 and 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Case was committed for trial to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Kasargod where it was taken on file as S.C. No.40 of 2007. Since petitioner was not available for trial case against him was split up and included in the long pending register as L.P.C. No.4 of 2009. In the meantime the Law Officer filed application under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to withdraw prosecution in S.C. No.40 of 2007. Prosecution was withdrawn and accused other than petitioner and 6th accused were acquitted as per Annexure-III, judgment dated October 30, 2009. Later the sixth accused approached this Court with Crl. M.C. No.1000 of 2010 and this Court as per order dated March 23, 2010 allowed that petition observing that whatever the law officer claimed in support of withdrawal from prosecution of the other accused is applicable to CRL.M.C. No.1665 of 2011 -: 2 :- the sixth accused also. Now it is the turn of 8th accused who has came with this Crl. M.C. Learned counsel submitted in the light of Annexures-III and IV proceeding against petitioner may be quashed. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. It is not shown that Annexure-III, judgment was challenged before any superior court. That judgment stands. Pursuant to that judgment this Court quashed proceedings against the sixth accused by Annexure-IV, order. There is no reason why the same standard should not be adopted in the case of petitioner-8th accused. Petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Annexure-III, judgment. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Proceeding against petitioner/8th accused in Crime No.252 of 2005 of Neleshwar Police Station pending as S.C.No.125 of 2011 of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-II), Kasargod are quashed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv