The acquittal of co-accused can lead to quashing ongoing prosecutions if it destroys the prosecution's foundation.

Headnote:
Abuse of Process - Criminal Proceedings - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - The court emphasized that if the substratum of a prosecution case is obliterated by the acquittal of co-accused, further proceedings may constitute an abuse of process, meriting quashing.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an accused in a criminal case, argued that the prosecution against him should be quashed due to the acquittal of co-accused, claiming a lack of evidence against him.
Finding of the Court:

The court reviewed precedents indicating that the acquittal of co-accused can fundamentally weaken the prosecution's case, determining that continued prosecution would be an abuse of process.
Issues: Whether the acquittal of co-accused affects the validity of the prosecution against the petitioner, warranting the quashing of proceedings?
Ratio Decidendi: The judgment confirms that if the foundation of the prosecution's case is negated by the acquittal of co-accused, the court has the authority to quash further proceedings under Section 482.
Final Decision: All further proceedings against the petitioner are quashed.

O R D E R

This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is

482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity).

2. The petitioner is the one of the accused in Crime No.

81 of 2019 of Edakkara Police Station which is now pending as C.C No . 380/2022 on the Magistrate Court, Nilambur. The above case is chargesheted alleging o 324 read with 34 IPC. It is submitted that the co-accused were already acquitted as per Annexure A3 judgment . It also submitted that even Section 313 Cr.PC statement was also not recorded, as far as the other accused is concerned because there is no evidence. Therefore, it submitted that in the light of Annexure A3, the prosecution against the petitioner is an abuse of process of Court.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public

Prosecutor. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused were already acquitted by the trial court and the continuation of the trial against the petitioner will be an abuse of process of court because the substratum of the prosecution case is shattered. The Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has to face trial before the lower court and this court may not invoke the powers under Section

482 of the Code.

4. This Court in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police

( 2006 (1) KLT 552 ), Abbas T.K. v. State of Kerala (2013 KHC 336) and in Ashraf Kancheriyil v. State of Kerala ( 2011(2) KHC 812 ) considered the powers of this court to invoke Section 482 of the Code to quash the proceedings based on the acquittal of co-accused. The dictum laid down by this court in the above judgment is that, if substratum of prosecution case is shattered by the judgment of acquittal of the co-accused that could be taken into account while considering the request to quash the proceedings. After going through the judgment of the trial court, I am of the considered opinion that the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner will be an abuse of process of court. It will be bene judgment by which the co-accused is acquitted:

“9. Upon going through the evidence of PW1 to PW3, no material is available to fasten criminal liability against the accused persons. Ext.P1 is not a substantive piece of evidence unless it is corroborated by the oral testimonies of witnesses. Since matter settled out of court between de-facto complainant and accused, prosecution was not able to prove case against accused with su documents marked by prosecution has also nothing to do with the above case. So I that accused persons are not guilty of the o points are found against the prosecution.”

5. From the above, it is clear that the substratum of the prosecution case is shattered by the judgment delivered by the lower court, while acquitting the co-accused. Therefore, this court is of the view that the continuation of the prosecution will be an abuse of process of court and it will be a judicial waste of time.

Hence this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C No . 380/2022 on the Nilambur, arising from Crime No. 81 of 2019 of Edakkara

Police Station are quashed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

JUDGE

Asw

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10444/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure -A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.

81/2019 OF THE EDAKKARA POLICE STATION

DATED 20-03-2019.

Annexure -A2 CERTIFIED COPY OF FINAL REPORT IN CRIME

NO. 81/2019 OF EDAKKARA POLICE STATION