IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 772 of 2009(F) ------------------------ CP.2/2009 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,-I, PERINTHALMANNA .................... PETITIONER(S)ACCUSED: -------------------------------- MOIDEEN KUTTY , S/O. ENU HAJI KOORITHODI HOUSE, KURUVAMBALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S)COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLALTHUR POLICE STATION (REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = CRL.M.C. NO. 772 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11th day of March, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to quash all further proceedings in C.P.2/09 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Perinthalmanna. The petitioner herein is the 8th accused in the case. He is facing allegation u/Ss.143, 147, 148, 308, 323, 324 and 341 r/w S.149 IPC. The contention is that the cases against some of the accused have been disposed of ending in acquittal and therefore it is necessary to quash the proceedings. The position is now clearly settled by a decision of this Court reported in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552(FB). This Court held that judgment of acquittal of a co-accused is not admissible to bar subsequent trial of absconding co-accused. It is also held that acquittal of accused after trial will not entitle the co-accused for an acquittal invoking inherent powers. Even otherwise when a case is proceeded against the accused that too when he is not present before the Court Crl.M.C. 772 OF 2009 -:2:- and it is against the other accused it is not possible to rely on that evidence to come to a conclusion that the present petitioner or the accused is not guilty. So in the light of those enunciated principles laid down by the Full Bench decision of this Court it is not possible to quash the proceedings and therefore the Crl.M.C. is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-