IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2010 / 8TH MAGHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 86 of 2010() ----------------------- CP.94/2009 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, ATTINGAL .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.2 --------------------------------------------- MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.SUDHAKARAN, KALICKAL HOUSE, VENGODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KAZHAKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/01/2010, THE COURT ON 28/01/2010 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. No. 86 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of January, 2010. ORDER This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to have the final report in C.P. No.94 of 2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Attingal, quashed. 2. Petitioner is the second accused in Crime No.26 of 2009 of 2003 of Kazhakoottam Excise Range for having committed offence punishable under Section 58 of the Kerala Abkari Act. The allegation is that the first accused in the case was found transporting five bottles of foreign liquor in a scooter on 1.6.2003. First accused was arrested and the crime was registered. Petitioner herein, who is the second accused, was implicated solely on the basis of the statement said to have been given by the first accused. No search was conducted in the house of the petitioner herein. Except the Crl.M.C. 86/2010. 2 statement said to have been given by the co-accused, there is no other material against the petitioner in this case. The first accused died on 7.7.2006 and the prosecution has produced the death certificate along with the final charge. In the light of this circumstance, no purpose will be served by proceeding with the prosecution against the petitioner herein, because there is absolutely no evidence at all in this case as against him. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor was heard. He was unable to show that there are any material other than the statement of the co-accused to implicate the petitioner. The various records in the case produced by the petitioner along with this petition were perused. On going through the records, it is clear that the sole material against the petitioner is the statement of the co-accused, who is no more. A similar issue was considered in the decision reported in Lizy Kurian v. State of Kerala (2004(1) KLJ 877). In that case the co-accused was acquitted. There also there was no evidence other than the statement given by the co-accused. Crl.M.C. 86/2010. 3 Accepting the plea of the petitioner therein, this Court quashed the charge against the petitioner in that case. 4. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, no purpose will be served by conducting the trial, since there are no materials to fasten the liability on the petitioner. It is well settled that the statement of a co-accused is not a piece of evidence normally sufficient to implicate the other accused. No purpose will be served by continuing the trial except it only results in waste of time. In the result, this petition is allowed and the final report in Crime No.26 of 2003 Kazhakoottam Excise Range pending as C.P. 94 of 2009 before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Attingal stands quashed. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.