IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 4872 of 2003 -------------------------------- CC.645/1997 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- PALLEKKENTHARAMMEL HASSAN, S/O. C.P.MAYENKUTTY, P.T. HOUSE, EZHOM (P.O), KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.SREEJITH S.NAIR RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------ STATE - REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.MUHAMMED PUZHAKKARA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C. 4872 of 2003-D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of December , 2008. ORDER Petitioner and 8 others were charge sheeted by Pazhayangadi Police in Crime No.193 of 1995 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341 and 323 read with Section 149 IPC. 2. Petitioner who was arraigned as accused No.4 in the above crime had reportedly absconded and therefore he did not face trial along with the other accused. The case against the petitioner was split up and re-numbered as CC.No.645/97, which is now stated to be pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Payyannur. 3. The learned Magistrate, before whom the case against the other 8 accused came up for trial in CC.No.714 of 1995, found that the prosecution had totally failed in proving the charge against the accused and accordingly they were found not guilty and acquitted under Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A copy of the judgment is on record as Annexure A1. 4. The prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code is to quash the proceedings now pending against the petitioner in CC.No.645/97 on the ground that no useful purpose will be served if he is tried in the case since all the prosecution witnesses had totally failed to support the prosecution case. 5. The prosecution case was that the accused, 9 in number, had in furtherance of their common object and due to group rivalry, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and committed rioting by Crl.MC.4872/2003. 2 wrongfully restraining the witnesses and assaulted them at about 8.30 p.m. on August 7, 1995 at Moonnampeedika. Pw.1 stated before the Court that he was assaulted by a group of people on the alleged day of the incident. But Pw.1 could not identify any of his assailants. He admitted that he had put his signature in Ext.P1 First information Statement. But he denied its authorship. He also stated he did not know any of the accused and that he had no grievance against them. 6. Pw.2 who was also one of the injured did not identify any of the accused. It was noticed by the learned Magistrate in Annexure A1 judgment that Pw.1 and other witnesses had categorically stated before the court that they had not seen the incident. Thus all the witnesses who were examined in the case had turned hostile. It was in the above circumstances that the learned Magistrate had acquitted all those accused, who had faced trial before him. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused Annexure A1 judgment, I have no hesitation to hold that no useful purpose will be served, if the petitioner is asked to face trial in the same case. In my view, such an exercise will be a drain on the exchequer, apart from wasting valuable time of the Court. In that view of the matter, the proceedings pending against the petitioner in C.C.No.645 of 1997 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Payyannur are quashed. Crl.M.C is allowed. A.K. Basheer Judge. an.