IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4628 of 2010 ---------------------------------- [LP.NO.60/2002 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, THRISSUR] .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- KANNAN, S/O. MANI ASSARI, T.C. 50/712, CHANDRA BHAVAN, MANAKKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.MOHANAN. RESPONDENT/STATE: -------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY S.I. OF POLICE, OLLUR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR, THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4628 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 24th November, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.904/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-III, Thrissur. As he was absconding, case against him was re- filed and included in the long pending register as L.P.60/2002. When the presence of the second accused was procured, he was tried. By Annexure-3 judgment he was acquitted. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case pending against him contending that in Annexure-3 judgment it is already found that it is only a civil dispute and therefore, no offence is attracted and so no purpose will be served by directing the Crmc 4628/10 2 petitioner to undergo the ordeal of a trial. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Petitioner is seeking to quash the case pending against him based on Annexure-3 judgment and the findings therein. As held by the Full Bench in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police (2006(1) KLT 552) based on Annexure-3 judgment acquitting the co-accused, case against the petitioner, the absconding accused cannot be quashed. Petitioner is at liberty to seek an order of discharge raising all the contentions before the learned Magistrate. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that a direction may be issued to the learned Magistrate to consider his application for bail on the date of Crmc 4628/10 3 surrender. When an accused against whom a non bailable warrant is pending, surrenders and files an application for bail, Magistrate is expected to pass orders in the application without delay. I find no reason to believe that the Magistrate is unaware of the provisions of law or the decisions of this court or the Apex court or that the Magistrate will not act in accordance with law. In such circumstances, no direction is warranted. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.