IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3831 of 2010(F) ------------------------------------- [S.C.NO.168/2010 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC-I), MANJERI, CRIME NO.173/2008 OF THE KARUVARAKUNDU POLICE STATION] .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ----------------------------------- SAJEEB RAHMAN, S/O.HYDRU HAJI @ KUNHAPPU HAJI, KALATHIL HOUSE, THUVVUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR. RESPONDENT/STATE: -------------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARUVARAKUNDU POLICE STATION - THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.3831 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 1st October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner was the second accused in S.C.260/2009 on the file of Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-I), Manjeri. Prosecution case was that on 27/8/2008 at about 8 p.m, nine accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of causing hurt or death to the injured Sulaiman and in furtherance of their common object armed with deadly weapons committed rioting and wrongfully restrained Sulaiman and voluntarily caused hurt and grievous hurt to Sulaiman as well as Usman and thereby committed the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323 326 and 308 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. As the petitioner was absconding, the case against him Crmc 3831/10 2 was split up and re-filed as S.C.168/2010. Remaining eight accused were tried. By Annexure-A judgment dated 8/3/2010, those accused were acquitted as both the injured, who were examined as Pws.1 and 2 did not support the prosecution case. So also Pws.3 and 4 the eye witnesses. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings against him contending that no useful purpose will be served by undertaking the trial in the light of the evidence already let in, in S.C.260/2009. Petitioner produced Annexures-B to E, certified copies of depositions of Pws.1 to 4 in S.C.260/2009. Pws.1 and 2 are the injured, Sulaiman and Usman. Annexures-B and C depositions show that when they were examined, they deposed that including the petitioner herein, the accused Crmc 3831/10 3 did not commit the offences. Annexures-D and E, the depositions of eye witnesses, Pws.3 ad 4 establish that they did not witness the incident. It is in such circumstances, petitioner would contend that when there is no likelihood of a successful prosecution, the case against him is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Though based on a judgment, acquitting the co-accused, an absconding accused is not entitled to get the case against him quashed, facts of the case is different. When the two injured were examined earlier when the co-accused were tried, they specifically deposed that the petitioner was also not there and he also did not commit any Crmc 3831/10 4 offence. Eye witness when examined deposed that they did not witness the incident. In the light of these evidence, even if they are to be examined again, there is no likelihood of an evidence against the petitioner. Consequently trial would only result in unnecessary waste of valuable time of the Court. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Petition is allowed. S.C.168/2010 on the file of Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-I), Manjeri is quashed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.