High Court Kerala High Court

K.Gangadharan vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Excise … on 17 December, 2008

Kerala High Court
K.Gangadharan vs State Of Kerala Rep.By Excise … on 17 December, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4672 of 2008()


1. K.GANGADHARAN, AGED 53 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY EXCISE INSPECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :17/12/2008

 O R D E R
                              R. BASANT, J.
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     Crl.M.C.No. 4672 of 2008
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
             Dated this the 17th day of December, 2008

                                 O R D E R

The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under the

Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner has now come to this court

with a prayer that the prosecution against him is not justified at

all in the light of the decision in Sunil v. State of Kerala (2006

(2) KLT 851).

2. Notice was given to the learned Prosecutor. The learned

Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits that the State is

satisfied that the prosecution against the petitioner cannot now

survive in the light of the decision cited above. In the light of

that submission, it is unnecessary to advert to facts in any greater

detail. I am satisfied that the prosecution deserves to be quashed.

3. The learned Magistrate had also come to the conclusion

that the continuation of the proceedings is not reasonable. The

learned Magistrate chose not to grant the relief as there was no

provision justifying such termination of proceedings. It is hence

Crl.M.C.No. 4672 of 2008
2

that the petitioner has come to this Court with this petition under

section 482 Cr.P.C.

4. Altogether there were two accused persons. The learned

Prosecutor reports that the co-accused has already dead.

5. In the result:

a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed.

b) S.T.C. 5391 of 2006, pending before the J.F.M.C.-I, Kannur,

in which the petitioner is the second accused, is hereby quashed.

c) Needless to say, proceedings under Section 446 Cr.P.C., if

any, pending against the petitioner and his sureties shall be disposed of

by the learned Magistrate in accordance with law.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm