IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 25TH AUGUST 2009 / 3RD BHADRA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 1636 of 2009() ------------------------------------- CC.714/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-IV, KOZHIKODE LP NO.107/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COUT-IV, KOZHIKODE. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 ------------------------------------------- ASHRAF PANANILATHU @ ASHRAF, S/O. ALAVI PANANILATHU @ ALAVI MASTER, AGED 38 YEARS, MUBARAK MANZIL, PATHAPPIRIYAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENTS/STATE AND DEFACTO COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. NATHASAHA C., D/O. MUHAMMED, LAIMOON, JAWAHAR COLONY, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE. SRI. S.U. NAZAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ FOR R2 SMT.K.K.PREETHA FOR R2 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------------- Crl. M.C. No.1636 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of August, 2009 O R D E R The petitioner was the 4th accused in C.C. No.714/2005 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-IV, Kozhikode. 2. The prosecution case is that in furtherance of their common intention, the four accused committed offences under Sections 406 and 498 A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. As the petitioner was absconding, the other three accused were tried in C.C No. 714/2005 after splitting up the case against the petitioner as C.C. No.514/2008. On the evidence, under Annexure A2 judgment, learned Magistrate acquitted accused Nos. 1 to 3. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case pending against him as L.P. No.107/2009, contending that in the light of the order of acquittal even if the petitioner is to be tried there is no chance of conviction. Crl. M.C. No.1636/ 2009 2 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 5. Annexure (1) F.I.R. and the accompanying complaint does not show any specific case as against the petitioner except the case alleged against all the accused. When Annexure 2 judgment shows that after examination of all the prosecution evidence, the learned Magistrate found that there is no legal evidence to prove that second respondent/defacto complainant was having 150 sovereigns of gold ornaments as alleged or that they were entrusted to the accused and the alleged harassment or cruelty is not proved, even if petitioner is to be tried, there is no possibility of a conviction. In the light of the finding in Annexure 2 judgment, even if the witnesses are to be examined once again, a different view cannot be taken, especially when no appeal was filed against the order of acquittal and it has become final. In such circumstances, the ordeal of a trial will serve no purpose except resulting in waste of valuable time of the Court. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice, the case is to be quashed. Crl. M.C. No.1636/ 2009 3 The petition is allowed. L.P. No.107/2009 (C.C.No.514/2008) on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV, is quashed. M. SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE scm