1. This application is filed under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-A charge. The petitioner was the 4th accused in C.C. No. 198/94 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakuda. As the petitioner was not available for trial, the case against him was split up the other accused were separately tried. After the trial, the other accused were found not guilty of the offence and they were acquitted. Annexure B is the certified copy of the judgment in C.C. No. 198/94. According to the petitioner the other accused were acquitted on the ground that there is no evidence to connect them with the case and therefore no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution against the petitioners. Hence, it is prayed that Annexure A charge may be quashed exercising the jurisdiction under S.482 of the Crl.P.C.

2. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and also the Public Prosecutor. No doubt, the case against the petitioner had to be split up since he was avoiding the process of the court. But in order to save public money and to avoid wastage of time I think Annexure A charge can be quashed exercising the jurisdiction under S.482 of the Crl.P.C. Annexure B, the certified copy of the judgment in C.C. No. 198/94 would show that all the witnesses in the case turned hostile and the other accused were acquitted since there is absolutely no evidence to connect them with the crime. The witnesses examined and the documents produced in C.C. No. 198/94 and the witness to be examined and the documents to be produced in the case are the same. Therefore, I fully agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution against the petitioner. Hence the petition is allowed quashing Annexure-A charge in C.C. No. 93/97 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Irinjalakuda.