The prayers in the above Criminal Miscellaneous Case filed

under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C. is as follows:

“Allow this Criminal Miscellaneous Case by Quashing Annexure

A-1 FIR with Complaint and Annexure A-2 Final report filed in Crime

No. 119/2008 and all further proceedings pending against the petitioner

in the interest of justice.”

2.

Heard Sri.V.Shyam, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Smt.Priya Shanavas, learned Prosecutor appearing for

the respondents.

3.

The petitioner herein has been arrayed as accused No.3 in

Anx.A-1 FIR in Crime No. 119/2008 of Padinjarathara Police Station,

registered for offences punishable under Secs. 366 and 376(2)(g) read

with Sec. 34 of the I.P.C. The Police, after investigation has filed the

impugned Anx. A-2 final report/charge sheet in the abovesaid crime,

which initially led to the pendency of Sessions Case S.C.No. 7/2012 on

the file of the file of the Addl. Sessions Court-I, Kalpetta. Altogether

there were 3 accused in the abovesaid sessions case. The case as

against the petitioner herein, who was arrayed as No.3, was split up

and was separately re-filed as S.C.No.162/2016. Accused Nos.1 and 2

faced trial and the Addl. Sessions Court-I, Kalpetta, as per Anx. A-3

Crl.M.C.5042/19

- : 3 :-

judgment dated 30.4.2016 in S.C.No. 72/2012 has acquitted both the

abovesaid accused Nos.1 and 2, as it was found that, based on the

evidence given by the prosecution witnesses, it is not possible to hold

that accused Nos.1 and 2 had committed the offences alleged. More

importantly, the prime witness (CW1, prosecutrix/ lady victim) could

not be examined as her whereabouts was not known to the Police

authorities at all and despite issuance of various non-bailable

warrants as against her, she could be apprehended and made

available to give evidence as prime witness in this case. Further with a

view to finding CW1 victim juvenile, the Police has issued several

news items and a case was also registered for the missing of CW1, but

it was no avail and therefore, the prosecution could not adduce

evidence of CW1 as the prime witness. After dealing with the

evidence of all the other 14 prosecution witnesses, the Sessions Court

has come to the considered conclusion as per Anx. A-3 judgment that

there was absolutely no evidence to hold that accused Nos. 1 and 2

have committed the alleged offences. It was found that the available

evidence was not sufficient to convict the accused persons for the

abovesaid criminal offence and accordingly, accused Nos.1 and 2 were

acquitted by the Sessions Court concerned as per Anx. A-3 judgment.

Crl.M.C.5042/19

- : 4 :-

The petitioner would contend that in view of the conclusive and

categorical acquittal of the co-accused as per Anx. A-3 judgment, the

very substratum of the prosecution case has been shattered and

therefore, continuance of the impugned criminal proceedings as

against the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of the process of the

court, as it would invariably lead to the acquittal of the petitioner

accused.

4.

The learned Prosecutor was requested to get instructions

and to find out whether there is any reasonable possibility of tracing

out CW1/prosecutrix, who is the prime witness in this case, so as to

give evidence in the trial proposed in the case of the petitioner herein

(A-3) in whose case, the case has been renumbered as S.C.No.

162/2016. The learned Prosecutor has made available the written

instructions of the investigating officer concerned, who has stated

that CW1 has been missing since February, 2014 and a case has been

registered as Crime No.206/2015 of Padinjarathara Police Station

under Sec.57 of the Kerala Police Act, on 15.6.2015 and despite

strenuous efforts by the Police, the whereabouts of CW1 could not be

traced out till date. The learned Prosecutor has also submitted on the

basis of instructions that it appears to be extremely difficult to know

Crl.M.C.5042/19

- : 5