IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 2406 of 2009() ----------------------------------- C.C.202/2007 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, VADAKKANCHERY .................... PETITIONER/ 2ND ACCUSED ---------------------------------------- FIROSE BABU, S/O.AMINAKUTTY, AMBALATHU HOUSE, KALTHOTTI, MEPADAM DESOM, CHELAKKARA. BY ADV. MR.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE ----------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P. RAVEENDRA BABU. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2406 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the second accused in C.C.No. 202/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Vadakkancherry. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case against him contending that accused 1, 4 and 5 were tried and acquitted by the Magistrate under Annexure-B judgment in C.C.No.225/2004 and in the light of the evidence therein and the findings, even if petitioner is to be tried, there is no likelihood of a conviction and in such circumstances, it is not, in the interest of justice, to continue the proceedings. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel, relying on Annexure-B judgment, is that when the prosecution examined the witnesses earlier when accused 1,4 and 5 were tried, only PW1 supported the prosecution CRMC 2406/09 2 case and PW2, the eye witness, turned hostile and evidence of PW1 was found to be unreliable and untrustworthy and in such circumstances, even if petitioner is to be tried, there is no chance of a conviction and hence, in the interest of justice, the case is to be quashed. 4. The fact that co-accused were acquitted after trial is not a ground to quash the case against the absconding accused. True, under Annexure-B judgment, learned Magistrate, on the evidence let in, held that evidence of PW1 does not appear to be reliable or trustworthy as there is no corroborative evidence. But, that does not mean that if petitioner is to be tried, there cannot be any corroborative evidence. In such circumstances, case as against the petitioner cannot be quashed. Petition is dismissed. 10th August, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv