IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 18TH BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1130 of 2010(E) ------------------------------- (CRIME NO.122/1990 OF VALANCHERY POLICE STATION NOW PENDING AS L.P.NO.10/2001 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PERINTHALMANNA) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED ------------------------------ CHANDRAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, THACHILLATH HOUSE, P.O.ATHAVANAD, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTING S.I. OF POLICE, VALANCHERY POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SVS/ M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.1130 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 9th September, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner, the fifth accused in C.C.468/1993 along with second accused absconded when the remaining four accused were tried by Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Perinthalmanna. By Annexure-V judgment those accused were acquitted of the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 323 and 324 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the case against the petitioner which is now pending as L.P.10/2001 on the ground that no purpose will be served by undergoing the ordeal of a trial in view of the evidence already recorded in C.C.468/1993. Crmc 1130/10 2 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 a judgment acquitting the co-accused, an absconding accused is not entitled to get the case against him quashed. Remedy of the absconding co-accused is to appear and face trial. Learned counsel submitted that a direction may be issued to the learned Magistrate to dispense with his presence at the time of trial. It is upto the petitioner to apply before the concerned Magistrate and it is for the learned Magistrate to decide whether exemption is to be granted or Crmc 1130/10 3 not. With liberty to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Magistrate, petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.