IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4490 of 2008 ------------------------- LPC.48/2003 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TALIPARAMBA .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSD ------------------------ YOUSUFF K., S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY, AGED 28 YEARS, KOLAPPALA HOUSE, P.O.PALLIVAYAL. PANNIYUR AMSOM, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.V.A.SATHEESH SRI.V.T.MADHAVANUNNI RESPONDENT: -------------- STATION HOUSE OFFICER, THALIPARAMBA POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ----------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 4490 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of November, 2008 O R D E R Petitioner along with the co-accused faced indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC. Altogether there were 5 named accused persons. The petitioner was not available for trial. When the case against all the other five came up before the Sessions Court, the learned Public Prosecutor filed an application under Section 321 Cr.P.C. The withdrawal was accepted and proceedings against them were closed. The case against the petitioner was split up and re-filed. It is now pending as L.P.No. 48/03, on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Taliparamba. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the orders of withdrawal contemplated withdrawal of the case against all the accused involved in the crime but, unfortunately, as the petitioner was not physically present before Court at the relevant time, the benefit of order of withdrawal was not extended to the petitioner. The continuance of the prosecution against the Crl.M.C. No. 4490 OF 2008 -:2:- petitioner is irrelevant. The proceedings may be quashed, it is submitted. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to take instructions. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the intention of the Prosecutor, when he applied for withdrawal, was to ensure that all further proceedings in the crime are terminated by the withdrawal. State has no objection against quashing of the surviving proceedings against the petitioner, it is submitted. 4. Having considered all the relevant circumstances, I am satisfied that the request of the petitioner can be accepted and thus totally irrelevant further continuance of the case against the petitioner can be terminated. 5. In the result : a) This Crl.MC is allowed. b) All further proceedings against the petitioner in pursuance of the final report in Crime No.451 of 2000 of Taliparamba police station, which is now pending as LPC No.48/03 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Taliparamba is hereby quashed. c) Needless to say, the proceedings if any pending Crl.M.C. No. 4490 OF 2008 -:3:- against the petitioner and sureties under Section 446 Cr.P.C, shall be disposed of in accordance with law. R. BASANT, JUDGE ttb Crl.M.C. No. 4490 OF 2008 -:4:- Crl.M.C. No. 4490 OF 2008 -:5:-