IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 1965 of 2009()
1. PRASAD, S/O.MATHEW,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :22/06/2009
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
==================
Crl.M.C. No. 1965 of 2009
==================
Dated this the 22nd day of June, 2009.
O R D E R
Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.12/2009 on the file
of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha. Petitioner
was originally the first accused in C.C.No.46/2007 on the
file of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha.
Prosecution case is that on 29-12-2006 at 6.00 PM when the
Sub Inspector conducted search in room No.VII/506 of
Thodupuzha Municipality, pirated CDs. of films were found
in the shop owned by the petitioner with second accused as
the sales man and both the accused thereby committed
offences under Sections 51 and 52A read with Sections 63
and 68A of Copy Right Act. As the petitioner was
absconding, case as against him was split up and second
accused was tried by the Magistrate. Under Annexure D
judgment, second accused was acquitted. This petition is
filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to
Crl.M.C.No.1965/2009
-2-
quash C.C.No.12/2009, which is the split up case as against
the petitioner, contending that as per Annexure C
registered power of attorney dated 13-12-2006, petitioner
entrusted the business to the second accused and on the
date of seizure of the pirated CDs. petitioner had nothing to
do with the business and therefore he is not liable for the
offences.
2. Annexure B final report submitted under Section
173(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure along with Annexure
D judgment establish that petitioner was not present at the
shop when the search was conducted and pirated CDs. were
seized on 29-12-2006. Second accused was the person, who
was found in charge of the shop. Learned Magistrate under
Annexure D judgment has already acquitted the second
accused. Annexure C registered power of attorney
executed by the petitioner in favour of second accused
establish that petitioner as he has to leave India due to his
employment in a foreign country and as he could not
Crl.M.C.No.1965/2009
-3-
conduct the business, petitioner entrusted the business with
the second accused. Therefore from 13-12-2006, petitioner,
who was admittedly out of India, has nothing to do with the
business. In such circumstances, petitioner cannot be held
liable for the offences committed on 29-12-2006 as he has
no control over the affairs or business of the shop then.
Moreover, second accused, who was put in charge of the
business, was already acquitted. Hence, it is not in the
interest of justice, to continue the proceedings as against
the petitioner because there cannot be a conviction.
3. Petition is allowed. C.C.No.12/2009 on the file of
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thodupuzha, as against the
petitioner is quashed.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
dkr