IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 3067 of 2009()
1. N.MUHAMMEDALI,S/O.KAMMUKKUTTY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.RAGHAVAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :22/09/2009
O R D E R
M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.
--------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.3067 of 2009
--------------------------
ORDER
Petitioner was the fourth accused in C.C.No.
43/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class
Magistrate’s Court, Pattambi. Prosecution case was
that the 30 accused therein formed themselves into
an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their
common object, on 6.12.1999, in protest against the
demolition of Babari Masjid, obstructed the
vehicular traffic and committed riot and blocked
the police bus and also pelted stones and broken
the glasses of the bus and thereby committed the
offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341 and 435
read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code and
Section 3(2)(c) of PDPP Act. As petitioner and
three other accused were absconding, learned
Magistrate committed the case as against the
remaining 26 accused to Sessions Court, Ottapalam,
which was taken cognizance as S.C.No.794/2007.
CRMC 3067/09 2
Under Annexure-B judgment, after recording the
evidence, finding that there is no evidence to
identify the members of the unlawful assembly, the
said accused were acquitted. The case as against
the petitioner was transferred to the long pending
register and was numbered as L.P.No.4/2005. This
petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure to quash the case as against the
petitioner contending that in view of the order of
acquittal of the co-accused, even if petitioner is
to be tried, there is no likelihood of a
conviction.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.
3. Annexure-A final report shows that there was
no specific allegation as against the petitioner,
except that he was also one among the 30 members of
the unlawful assembly, who committed the offences.
Annexure-B judgment shows that 26 out of the thirty
accused, who were tried by the learned Sessions
CRMC 3067/09 3
Judge, were acquitted. In view of the evidence
recorded therein and the order of acquittal, it is
clear that even if petitioner is to be tried, there
is no likelihood of a conviction. In such
circumstances, it would result only in unnecessary
waste of valuable time of the court.
Petition is allowed. The case as against the
petitioner, now pending as L.P.No.4/2005 on the
file of Assistant Sessions Court, Ottapalam, is
quashed.
22nd September, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)
tkv