SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 17978

Ziyad Rahman A. A, J
RAJEEV – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
CRL.MC NO. 352 OF 2017 | CRIME NO.39/2005



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR, SRI.ARUN KRISHNA DHAN, SRI.T.K.SANDEEP
For the Respondents: SRI.SUDHEER GOAPALAKRISHNAN

Previous acquittals of co-accused do not bar the prosecution of other accused in a crime, as each case must be evaluated based on its own merits.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 143, 147, 148, 447, 427, 326, 302 - Quashing proceedings under Section 482 - Accused sought to quash proceedings in light of acquittal of co-accused in prior trials - The substratum of the case must be considered; however, the court determined that the previous acquittals are not sufficient to quash current charges, as evidence may support continued prosecution - The petitioners were fugitives from justice, further complicating their application. (Paras 17, 9, and 10)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - The inherent powers of the court under this section are to be used cautiously; dismissing the application due to lack of merit and because there were substantial reasons for proceeding with the trial. (Paras 16 and 17)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners are accused in a serious FIR that involved violent acts and conspiracy, while seeking to quash proceedings based on a previous court's judgment that called into question the validity of the FIR which was seen as improperly registered.

Findings of Court:
The court found that prior judgments do not automatically invalidate new charges, especially when the possibility of successful prosecution exists despite previous acquittals.

Issues: The main issue was whether previous acquittals of co-accused bars prosecution under the same crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that acquittals of some accused do not necessarily negate the prosecution of others involved in an unlawful assembly or conspiracy; each case must be assessed on evidence presented in ongoing trials.

Result: Crl.M.C. dismissed.

Table of Content
1. accused numbers and the offenses involved in the case. (Para 1 , 2)
2. circumstances leading to the charges against the petitioners. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. counsel’s arguments on quashing and prosecution challenges. (Para 6 , 7)
4. court’s observations on acquittals and continuing trials. (Para 8 , 9 , 11)
5. judgment affirming continued prosecution despite past findings. (Para 10 , 12 , 15)

ORDER

The petitioners are accused Nos.3, 8 and 9 in Crime No.39/2005 of Vallikkunnam Police Station, which was registered against 17 accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 447, 427, 326, 302 read with Sections 149 IPC , 153 (A)(1)(a)&(b) 120B of . The prayer sought for by the petitioners is to quash all proceedings in the said crime, as all the other accused persons were acquitted as per the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Court II, Mavelikkara in SC 594/2005 and also as per the judgment in Crl.A.No.1561/2009 by this Court.

2. The prosecution case is as follows: On 23.02.2015 at 9 p.m., one Ashraf and two other persons were coming out of Kaduvinal Mosque within the local limits of Vallikkunnam Police Station. At that time, in pursuance of a conspiracy between the accused persons, they formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons like swords, sticks, iron roads and bamboo sticks, came in a motorcycle and a jeep driven by A 16 and A17 respectively, to the said Mosque. After reaching the Mosque, A1 to A5 and A8 to A10 jumped out of the jeep and criminally trespassed into eastern courtyard in front of the Mosque with the said deadly weapons and assaulted the said Ashraf. The 1st accused inflicted a cut injury with a sword and accused Nos.4,5,8,9 and 10 indiscriminately beat him with iron rods all over his body.

3. On seeing the attack, two persons, who were along with the said Ashraf ran away from the spot and thereafter the accused Nos.3 to 10 destroyed tube lights installed in front of the Mosque. Thereafter the accused persons proceeded towards south through the road in front of the Mosque by the said jeep as well as motor bike and stopped the vehicle on seeing CW2 who was standing on the road in front of his house. A2 and A3 jumped out of the jeep and assaulted him as well by uttering the word ‘cut and kill him’. It was alleged that the 2nd accused inflicted a cut with a sword aiming towards the neck of the said person, which was warded off by him with his left hand and thereby he sustained fracture of bonds of his left wrist. He was also attacked by bamboo sticks. The said Ashraf later succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment and CW2 sustained injuries. The offences as mentioned above were registered on the basis of the said allegations. The first information was furnished by PW15, who appeared before the Police at 6 a.m. on 24.02.2005.

4. During trial, A1 and A6 died. The case against remaining accused persons were committed to the Sessions Court. The petitioners herein i.e A3, A8 and A9, have absconded after the committal proceedings and therefore case against them was spit up. The case against the other accused persons was numbered as S.C.No.594/2005 and tried by Additional Sessions Court II, Mavelikkara. The cases against 1st petitioner (A3) was refiled as SC No 550/2015, as against 2nd petitioner (A8), it was numbered as SC No 854/2010 and as against the 3rd petitioner( A9) the case was refiled as SC No 490/2012. After a full fledged trial the Sessions Court found A2, A4, A5, A10 and A17 guilty of the offences and they were convicted in S.C.No.550/2015. The other accused persons namely, A7, A11, A12, A13, A14, A15 and A16 in the said Sessions Case were acquitted. The convicted accused persons filed Crl.A.1561/2009 before this court and as per Annexure II judgment passed by this Court, all the appellants therein were acquitted.

5. The prayer sought for by the petitioners in this case is that in the light of the judgment rendered by this Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top