AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 249 wordsC.S.Dias, J
The revision petition is filed challenging the order passed in C.M.P.No.5042/2010 in C.C.No.817/2009 of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Wadakkanchery, dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner/fifth accused to discharge him under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(in short, ‘Code’).
The revision petitioner was the fifth accused in Crime No.6/2005 on the files of the Wadakkanchery Police Station, registered against him and 11 other persons, who have allegedly committed the offences under Sections 467, 468, 474, 475 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Police, after investigation filed Annexure-B final report. Although the petitioner filed C.M.P.No.5042/2010 to discharge him, the learned Magistrate, by the impugned order, dismissed the application. The said order is illegal, improper and irregular. Hence, the revision petition.
Heard; Smt. Dhanya P. Ashokan, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Smt.Seetha.S, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State.
The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that the revision petitioner died on 20.08.2018. In view of the death of the revision petitioner, the revision petition has become infructuous. Hence, the same may be dismissed as abated.
In the light of the above submission and Section 394 of the Code read with a law laid down by this Court in Pazhani v. State of Kerala [2017(1) KLT 341(FB)], I am of the view that the revision petition has abated.
Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed as abated.