IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2010 / 25TH ASHADHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 2697 of 2010() ------------------------- CC.764/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KAYAMKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED NO.3 --------------------------- BIJU, S/O.GEORGE, BIJU BHAVANAM, ERUMAKUZHY MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL SMT.ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I.OF POLICE, VALLIKUNNAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.S.HRITHIK THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. --------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.2697 of 2010 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of July, 2010 ORDER Heard both sides. Petitioner who is the third accused in Crime No.237/2009 of Vallikunnam Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 332 & 336 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 119(1), 128 & 177 read with Section 179 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and now pending before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kayamkulam as C.C.No.764 of 2009 seeks to quash the proceedings as against him. 2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows:- On 26/7/2009 at about 3.15 p.m. a woman police constable attached to Vallikunnam Police Station was on traffic control duty at Kattanam Junction of Kayamkulam- Punaloor Road. While so, a motor cycle driven by the Crl.M.C.No.2697/2010 : 2 : first accused in which the second accused and the petitioner (herein A3) were pillion riders came along that way in a very high speed from west towards east. Eventhough the police constable signaled the first accused to stop the motor bike, without obeying the said direction, the first accused attempted to hit her with the motor cycle. Seeing it the people who gathered there caught hold of the second accused and the petitioner. The first accused however proceeded in the motor cycle towards the eastern direction. The accused have thereby committed the above said offences. 3. Even going by the version given by the woman police constable on duty, the petitioner had no role in the commission of the alleged offences. He was not riding the motor cycle and he had no control of the vehicle. There is no utterance also by the petitioner exhorting the first accused who was driving the vehicle to do any of the acts alleged. Under these circumstances it cannot be said that the petitioner committed the alleged offences. Crl.M.C.No.2697/2010 : 3 : If at all those offences were committed it was the 1st accused who was in control of the vehicle. Hence the final report in Crime No.237 of 2009 of Vallikunnam Police Station as well as C.C.No.764 of 2009 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kayamkulam so far they relate to the petitioner (3rd accused) shall stand quashed. This Criminal M.C. is accordingly allowed. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj