IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 16TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 473 of 2008() ------------------------ CC.379/2007 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, THAMARASSERY .................... PETITIONERS: ACCUSED: --------------------------- 1. A. SIDDIQUE, S/O. ABU, AMBARAMMAL VEEDU, KARANTHUR AMSOM. 2. ABDUL MAJEED, S/O.HUSSAIN, PAYANKARA VEEDU, KODUVALLY AMSOM. 3. SHARAFUDHEEN, S/O. BAVA, AMBARAMMAL VEEDU, KARANTHUR AMSOM. 4. ABDUL KHADER, S/O. IBRAHIM, AMBARAMMAL VEEDU, KARANTHUR AMSOM. 5. ABDUL SALAM, S/O. HUSSAIN, PARAPURATHU VEEDU, KODUVALLY AMSOM. 6. NAZER, S/O. MOIDEEN, THANNIKUNDUNGAL VEEDU, KODUVALLY AMSOM. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: STATE: ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THAMARASSERY. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SRI.M.S. BREEZE. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 473 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Petitioners who are accused Nos. 5 to 9 in CC No.516 of 2001 of Thamarassery Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 384 read with Section 34 IPC and whose case is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Thamarassery, as CC No.379 of 2007, consequent on their abscondance before that Court in CC No.516 of 2001, seek to quash the proceedings before the Magistrate on the ground that the co-accused in the case have been acquitted after trial as per Annexure A2 judgment dt.27.09.07. 2. In the light of the decision of the Full Bench in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552], the petitioners cannot seek to quash the proceedings mainly for the reason that the co-accused have been acquitted after trial. Hence the only course of action open to the petitioners is to plead for a discharge before the Magistrate. I am inclined to permit the petitioners to plead for a discharge in absentia by filing a petition through their counsel. CrlMC No. 473 of 2008 2 Accordingly, if the petitioners file an application for discharge before the Magistrate within two weeks from today in absentia, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the learned Magistrate after examining their contention that the co-accused have been acquitted after trial. It is made clear that the Magistrate shall not insist on the personal appearance of the petitioners for the disposal of the discharge petition to be filed hereafter. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE btt CrlMC No. 473 of 2008 3