Section 149 IPC liability arises from common object inferred from circumstances; no need for overt act by each member. Quashing under 482 CrPC not for factual disputes.

O R D E R

Dated this the 9thday of March, 2026 This Crl.M.C. is filed by the petitioner who is arrayed as the 8th accused in Crime No.653 of 2018, Pazhayannur Police Station, Thrissur, pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Wadakkanchery, as C.C.No.520 of 2020. He seeks to quash the Final Report and Charge Sheet in the said C.C. wherein he stands implicated of having committed offences punishable underSections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326 and 354 read withSection 149of theIndian Penal Code.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner, who is a resident of Vadanappally, Thrissur, had, along with other accused, on 03.12.2018, at around 05.00 P.M., assaulted respondents 3 to 6 using steel rods at Thrikkanaya, Elanad, causing severe injuries to them.

3. In the Crl.M.C., petitioner has contended that he is totally innocent of the charges alleged and that he is a photographer who had sought a lift in the vehicle in which the other accused in the crime happened to travel. He is not a member of the unlawful assembly, and just happened to travel with the other accused by chance. In the Final Report, it had not even been alleged against the petitioner that he had committed any overt act or had shared a common object with others involved in the crime. The wrongful implication, it is averred is now costing the petitioner dearly, as his prospects of a job opportunity in the Gulf stand jeopardised. He thus seeks to quash the Final Report/Charge Sheet.

4. Heard Sri.C.A.Anoop, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri.Sanal P. Raj, learned Public Prosecutor for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri.M.V.Joy, Advocate, for respondents 3 to 6.

5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the charges against the petitioner are not even prima facie revealed from the Final Report and that the common object, which is a prime ingredient for sustaining the charge, has not even been suggested. The participation of the 8th accused/petitioner in the incident has also not been established on a prima facie basis. It is submitted that to attract the invocation of Section 149 IPC, every member of the unlawful assembly has to be guilty of the offence in so far as he had proceeded along with others in prosecution of a common object of the said assembly and that each and every one of them, knew that the crime is likely to be committed if they proceed further in prosecution of that object. The learned counsel strenuously contends that none of these ingredients are present in the facts and circumstances as revealed in Annexure 3 Final Report or from the statement of the witnesses. The Final Report, thus, according to the learned counsel, does not reveal that the petitioner has committed any offence that would attract the ingredients of . The charge laid against the said accused is, it is submitted, fit to be quashed.

6. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor submits that the ingredients for attracting Section 149 IPC has been made out in the Final Report and that the question whether an offence under had been made out or whether an unlawful assembly has been constituted and whether the accused including the petitioner were proceeding in common prosecution of the object, are matters to be decided on evidence during trial and not in the present proceedings. It is trite and settled that under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court would not be justified in minutely appreciating the Final Report and/or in arriving at a conclusion regarding the culpability of any of the accused solely based on the Charge Sheet. The ingredients of the offence are to be proved by examining the witnesses, and none of the