IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 2354 of 2004()
1. ABDULKHADER, S/O.ABDULKARIM,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.ANIL
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :13/07/2007
O R D E R
R.BASANT, J.
----------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2354 of 2004
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of July 2007
O R D E R
The petitioner is the first accused in a prosecution inter alia
under Section 498A I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of
the final report submitted by the police. The de facto complainant, in
that case is the wife of the petitioner. The wife had allegedly been
divorced even prior to the filing of the complaint.
2. Cognizance was taken. The petitioner was not available
for trial. Accused 2 to 5 faced trial. They were found not guilty and
acquitted. The petitioner has now come before this court with the
prayer that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked and the
proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed in the light of the
judgment acquitting the co-accused.
3. The position of law has now been settled and laid down
beyond any trace of confusion or doubt by the Full Bench decision in
Moosa vs. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552]. It is now
evident that an absconding co-accused cannot claim any benefit or
advantage from the mere fact that the co-accused, who faced trial
have been found not guilty and acquitted. I have gone through the
judgment of acquittal of accused 2 to 5. The decision in that case is
only to the effect that accused 2 to 5 are entitled to acquittal as there
Crl.M.C.No.2354/04 2
is no evidence against them. No finding has been entered in that
case, the advantage of which can be taken by the petitioner herein. I
am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the prayer for invocation of
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against
the petitioner is without any basis.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a
warrant of arrest is pending against the petitioner. He prays that
appropriate directions may be issued in the matter.
5. There shall be a direction that the warrant of arrest issued
against the petitioner shall not be executed till 23/7/2007. In the
meantime, the petitioner must appear before the learned Magistrate
and apply for regular bail. The learned Magistrate must consider
such application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law
and expeditiously – on the date of surrender itself, if such application
is filed after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge
of the case.
6. This petition is dismissed with the above
directions/observations.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
jsr
// True Copy// PA to Judge
Crl.M.C.No.2354/04 3
Crl.M.C.No.2354/04 4
R.BASANT, J.
CRL.M.CNo.
ORDER
21ST DAY OF MAY2007