IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4842 of 2010()
1. ASHRAF K., AGED 34 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE,
... Respondent
2. ASOKAN P.S., AGED 45 YEARS,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.P.HARISH
For Respondent :SRI.VETTATH EAPEN MATHAI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :10/12/2010
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
---------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO.4842 OF 2010
---------------------------------------------
Dated 10th December, 2010
O R D E R
Petitioner was the second accused
in C.P.31/2002 on the file of Judicial
First Class Magistrate’s Court-I, Hosdurg.
As he was absconding, the case against the
other three accused was committed to the
Sessions Court. It was taken on file as
S.C.256/2002. By Annexure-AIV judgment,
those accused were acquitted. Case against
the petitioner is now pending as
L.P.86/2003 before the committal court.
Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code
of Criminal Procedure to quash the
proceedings pending before the learned
Magistrate, contending that in view of the
order of acquittal against the co-accused
Crmc 4842/10
2
and also due to the settlement, evidenced by
Annexure-AV consent letter, it is not in the
interest of justice to continue the prosecution.
2. Second respondent is the de facto
complainant. He appeared through a counsel and
filed an affidavit submitting that all the
disputes with the petitioner were settled
amicably and he has no objection for quashing
the case. A joint petition was also filed along
with the petitioner to compound the offence.
3. Prosecution case is that on 2/6/2001
at about 11.30 a.m petitioners along with the
other three accused and some others who are
not identified, formed themselves into an
unlawful assembly with the common object of
setting fire to the building belonging to the
wife of the second respondent and in
furtherance of their common object, set fire to
Crmc 4842/10
3
the textile shop and caused loss of Rs.Nine
Lakh and thereby committed the offences under
Sections 143, 147 and 436 read with Section 149
of Indian Penal Code. Annexure-AIV judgment
shows that when three of the four accused were
tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
only four witnesses were examined, including
the de facto complainant second respondent and
reporting that the matter has been settled,
they did not adduce any evidence against the
accused and therefore, examination of the other
witnesses was dispensed with. Those accused
were acquitted. Affidavit filed by the de facto
complainant establishes that even if, second
respondent or the other witnesses are to be
examined, there is no likelihood of a
successful prosecution, as it would only result
in unnecessary waste of valuable time of the
Crmc 4842/10
4
Court. Hence it is not in the interest of
justice to continue the prosecution.
Petition is allowed. L.P.86/2003 on the
file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s
Court-I, Hosdurg is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.
uj.