IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 4321 of 2005() ------------------------- CC.62/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II, HOSDRUG .................... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.1. 5 AND 6. ------------------------------------- 1. K.SASI, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 32 YEARS, BALAKKAD HOUSE, ARATTUKADAVU, PALLIKKARA-II, VILLAGE. 2. DEVADASAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, AGED 32 YEARS, PALAKKUNNU, PALLIKKARA-II, VILLAGE. 3. K.V.VINOD, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, AGED 33 YEARS K.V.NIVAS, PALAKKUNNU, PALLIKKARA -II, VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.M.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT. ---------------------------- 1. S.H.O. BEKAL POLICE STATION, IN CRIME NO.294/2001. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.B. JAYASURYA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl. M.C No.4321/2005 -2- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES ANNEXURE -A1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CC 345/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, HOSDURG DATED 31-01-2005/. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE AMG B.P. RAY, J. ------------------------------------------------- Crl. M.C No. 4321 OF 2005 ------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 8th DAY OF AUGUST, 2011 O R D E R Heard Learned Counsel Shri. S. Rajeev on behalf of Adv. M. Santhosh Kumar for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Petitioners are accused in CC No.52/2005 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 read with 149 I.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that co accused faced trial and acquitted by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Hosdurg by judgment dated 31-01-2005 in CC No.345/2002. The relevant portion of the judgment is extracted below: “6. Point Nos.1 and 2 : For the sake of brevity and convenience these points are taken up together for discussion. As stated earlier the prosecution examined PW1 to PW4 and marked Ext.P1. PW1 and PW2 are the injured. Ext.P1 is the statement given by PW1 to the police. PW3 and PW4 are the alleged eye witnesses. PW1 and PW2 would say that they do not know who the assailants were. According to them they have not mentioned the names of the Crl. M.C No.4321/2005 -2- accused to the police. PW3 and PW4 would say that they have not seen the incident. Even though the learned A.P.P has cross examined all the witnesses nothing incriminating could be brought out against the accused. In view of the evidence tendered by PW1 to PW4 the learned A.P.P has rightly given up the remaining witnesses. No fact is proved before this court to connect the accused with the alleged crime. Therefore, the points are found against the prosecution. 7. Point No.3: In view of my finding on Point No.1 and 2 this point does not arise for determination. 8. In the result the accused Nos.2 to 4 and 7 are found not guilty of the offences punishable u/s 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 r/w 149 IPC and they are acquitted u/s 248 (1) Cr.PC. The bond executed by them shall stand cancelled and they are set at liberty. Case against A1, A5 and A6 is split up and refiled as CC No.62/2005.” 4. In view of the above findings, no useful purpose will be served by directing the petitioners to face trial. Accordingly, I direct that CC No.52/2005 pending on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Hosdurg be treated as closed. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. Sd/- B.P. RAY, JUDGE. AMG True copy P.A to Judge