Deepulal @ Thanku vs State Of Kerala on 11 December, 2007

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 3568 of 2007()


1. DEEPULAL @ THANKU, S/O. VELAPPAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. SUNIL V.ABBAS, S/O. ABBASKUTTY,

4. NAJITHA BEEVI,

5. ABBASKUTTY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.D.KISHORE

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :11/12/2007

 O R D E R
                           R. BASANT, J.
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                 Crl.M.C.No. 3568 of 2007
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
           Dated this the 11th day of December, 2007

                              O R D E R

The petitioner is the second accused and he faces

indictment in a prosecution for offences punishable, inter alia,

under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 & 354 r/w, 149 I.P.C.

The case against all the co-accused has already been disposed of.

The petitioner could not appear at that stage. Hence the case

against him has been split up and that alone is continuing now.

The petitioner wants to appear before the learned Magistrate and

seek premature termination of the proceedings by invoking the

jurisdiction under Section 258 Cr.P.C.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 354 I.P.C. are

all compoundable. He wants to ensure that an application for

composition is filed for the compoundable offences. He has a

further contention that the co-accused having already been found

not guilty and acquitted, he is entitled for premature termination

Crl.M.C.No. 3568 of 2007
2

of the proceedings by invoking the jurisdiction under Section 258

Cr.P.C.

3. The petitioner can certainly appear before the learned

Magistrate and seek composition of the compoundable offences. He

can certainly urge before the learned Magistrate that in view of the

composition of the compoundable offences as also the acquittal of all

the co-accused for offences under Sections 143, 147 and 148 I.P.C. the

prosecution against the petitioner need not continue and is liable to be

discontinued under Section 258 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate must

consider such contentions and pass appropriate orders.

4. The counsel finally submits that if personal presence of the

petitioner were insisted, that would cause great hardship and loss to the

petitioner. All offences are found to be summons offences and I find

no reason why the petitioner cannot apply for exemption under Section

205 Cr.P.C. Such application, if filed, will be considered by the

learned Magistrate on merits and appropriate orders passed,

notwithstanding the circumstance that a non-bailable warrant may be

pending against the petitioner.

Crl.M.C.No. 3568 of 2007
3

5. This Crl.M.C. is allowed to the above extent.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm