IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 755 of 2011 -------------------------------- [CC.NO.614/2010 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PATTAMBI] .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS. 1 & 2: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.SIVARAMAN NAMBOODIRI, PERUMBILATH MANAKKALPADY, ANAKKARA. 2. NIZAR, S/O.ASSAINAR, PAPPURATH HOUSE, VARATTIPALLIYALIL, ANAKKARA. BY SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. SRI.P.M.RAFIQ, SRI.V.C.SARATH. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. S.I. OF POLICE, CHALISSERY POLICE STATION – 679 536. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Crl. M.C. No.755 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2011 O R D E R Petitioners seek to quash Annexure-A complaint filed by the officer authorised under the Protection of River Bank and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 on the ground that petitioner had already been tried and acquitted for the same offence in C.C. No.184 of 2008 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Pattambi. Charge was framed against him in that case. As the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor sought permission for withdrawal from prosecution that request was allowed and petitioner was acquitted under Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, “the Code”). It is contended that hence a second trial based on Annexure-A, complaint is not warranted in view of Article 20 of the Constitution and Sec.300 of the Code. 2. When the matter came up for hearing, learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioners sought permission to withdraw this proceeding without prejudice to right of petitioners to take CRL.M.C. No.755 of 2011 -: 2 :- appropriate defence in the trial court. Having heard learned Senior Advocate and the learned Public Prosecutor I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly, Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the right of petitioners to take appropriate defence in the course of trial of the case and as provided under law. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv