IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2010 / 30TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4156 of 2010(B) -------------------------------------- [SC.NO.159/2004 OF ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC), MAVELIKKARA, CRIME NO.395/2001 OF NOORNADU POLICE STATION] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- ANIYAN KUNJU DANIEL, KADAMBASSERIL, KOTTAKKATTU MURI, THAMARAKULAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKARA. BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4156 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 22nd October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the second accused in C.P.160/2002 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Mavelikara did not appear at the committal stage. Therefore, case against him was split up and case against first accused was committed to Additional Sessions Court, Mavelikara and taken on file as S.C.159/2004. By Annexure-A2 judgment learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the first accused finding that prosecution failed to prove the case. When petitioner appeared subsequently, the case against him was committed to the Sessions Court. It is now pending before Additional Sessions Court, Mavelikara. Crmc 4156/10 2 Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings against him contending that in view of the findings in Annexure-A2 judgment that whole prosecution case is clouded with suspicion, continuation of the proceedings will serve no purpose, as there is no likelihood of conviction and therefore, the case is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. As held by the Full Bench of this Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006 (1) KLT 552), based on the judgment of acquittal of the co-accused, an absconding accused is not entitled to get the case against him quashed. True, Annexure-A2 judgment shows Crmc 4156/10 3 that based on the evidence recorded, learned Additional Sessions Judge found that prosecution case is clouded with suspicion. But based on that finding case cannot be quashed. Petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions before the learned Sessions Judge and seek an order of discharge under section 227 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is disposed granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions, including the findings in Annexure-A3, and seek an order of discharge under Section 227 of Code of Criminal Procedure. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.