IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 1644 of 2011() ------------------------- CC.649/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, TIRUR .................... (CRIME NO.34/2001 OF VALANCHERY POLICE STATION) ....... PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.3: ------------------------------------------------- P.V.MUHAMMED KUNJU, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, RESIDING AT PUTHEN VEETTIL HOUSE, THOZHUVANNOOR P.O., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.S.ABDUL KAREEM RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. MANU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss CRMC.NO.1644/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX.A1: COPY OF THE F.I.R. DTD. 3/2/2001. ANNEX.A2: COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET DTD. 26/11/05. ANNEX.A3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 31ST JULY, 09. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.1644 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011. ORDER Petitioner is the third accused in Crime No.34 of 2001 of Valanchery Police Station and C.C.No.649 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tirur for offences punishable under Section 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 read with Section 12 of the Press and Regulation of Book Act. Allegation is that petitioner and two others, with intent to defame the students and staff of MES College, Valanchery published notices containing defamatory matters and printed somewhere. Petitioner requests to quash proceeding against him on the strength of Annexure-A3, judgment in C.C.No.1217 of 2005 dated 31.07.2009 acquitting accused 1 and 2 under Section 248 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner was not available for trial along with accused 1 and 2 and hence case against him was split up and refiled as C.C.No.649 of 2009. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also. 2. Annexure-A3, judgment shows that accused 1 and 2 faced trial in C.C.No.1217 of 2005 and were acquitted since none of the material prosecution witnesses spoke regarding the alleged incident implicating accused 1 and 2. PW1, Principal of the College gave complaint to the Police in the matter. He stated that notices were circulated in the College but he does not know who had Crl.MC No.1644/2011 2 printed and circulated the same. PW2 is the Head of Commerce Department. He does not know who printed and circulated the notices. PWs 3 to 5 are Teachers of the College and they claimed that they did not know anything about the incident. Evidence of PWs 1 to 5 the material prosecution witnesses was found to be of no worth to implicate accused 1 and 2. Now petitioner seeks benefit of Annexure-A3, judgment. 3. In the light of evidence PWs 1 to 5 have given in C.C.No.1217 of 2005, case of the prosecution against petitioner stands badly affected. PWs 1 to 5 cannot turn round and say that it was petitioner who had either printed or circulated the notice in question. In view of the same sending petitioner for trial is only a wasteful exercise. Resultantly this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. Proceeding against petitioner ( third accused in Crime No.34 of 2001 of Valanchery Police Station) in C.C.No.649 of 2009 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tirur is quashed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks