IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2008 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 1851 of 2008() ----------------------------------- ST.306/02 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PARAVOOR .................... PETITIONER/ IST ACCUSED --------------------------------------- BHADRAKUMAR, S/O.BHARGAVAN, PARANKIMAMVILA VEEDU, CHEERALKAVU CHERRI, EZHUKONE VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENTS/ COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE S.I. OF PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI . THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 1851 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2008 ORDER The petitioner is the 3rd accused in a prosecution under the Kerala Abkari Act. Altogether, there were 4 accused persons. The crux of the allegations is that the 1st accused was found selling illicit liquor from a toddy shop of which the petitioner is the licensee. The petitioner was not available for trial. The case against him was split up. Accused 1 and 2, who were available, faced trial. After a full trial, the learned Magistrate found the said accused 1 and 2 not guilty and acquitted them. The case against the petitioner/3rd accused is proceeding. 2. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner has come before this Court with a prayer that powers under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. may be invoked to quash the surviving prosecution against him. The culpability of the petitioner is Crl.M.C. No. 1851 of 2008 -: 2 :- dependent on the culpability of the 1st accused. After a full trial where the prosecution was permitted to examine all witnesses and the prosecution did examine all witnesses, it has been found that the 1st accused is not guilty. 3. It is submitted that, in these circumstances, there is no meaning or relevance in the continuation of the prosecution so far as the petitioner is concerned. It is hence submitted that the substratum of the prosecution case having already been lost, there is absolutely no justification in the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notwithstanding the dictum of the Full Bench in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552), the petitioner is entitled for quashing of the proceedings against him. 5. In the above circumstances, it is prayed that the relief may be granted to the petitioner. 6. Having considered all the relevant inputs and having gone through the judgment of acquittal rendered in favour of the co-accused who participated the trial, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-II, I note that all the witnesses whom the prosecution wanted to examine were examined in the trial against accused 1 and 2 and that it is on the basis of such Crl.M.C. No. 1851 of 2008 -: 3 :- evidence that the learned Magistrate had come to the conclusion that the 1st accused has not committed the offence. If the 1st accused has not committed the offence, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is no possibility of entering any finding of guilt against the petitioner. The substratum of the prosecution case against the petitioner is thus lost by an acquittal on merits after a full trial granted to the 1st accused. In some other similar cases which are also being disposed of today, it must be noted that in the trial against the co-accused the prosecution had not and could not place before court all materials on which they wanted to place reliance. I am, in these circumstances, persuaded to agree that the proceedings against the petitioner can be quashed. 7. In the result: (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. (b) S.T.No.306/02 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Paravoor, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Crl.M.C. No. 1851 of 2008 -: 4 :-