R. Radhakrishnan vs State of Kerala and M.R. Rajan

Thomas P. Joseph, J.—Petitioner is the 10th accused in Crime No. 183 of 1995 of Anthikad Police Station and C.P. No. 16 of 2001 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thrissur for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 326, 307 and 120(b) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. That case was registered against 16 accused alleging that on 18.10.1995 at about 5.30 p.m they formed into an unlawful assembly with intent to cause death of CW2/PW2 and assaulted him. Case against Petitioner and others was split up as they were not available for trial and refiled as S.C. No. 433 of 2004. Some of the accused faced trial in S.C. No. 470 of 2001 and vide Annexure-AII, judgment dated July 25, 2004 they were acquitted u/s 232 of the Code of Criminal Procedure since none of the witnesses supported the prosecution. Prayer in this criminal miscellaneous case is to quash proceeding against Petitioner on the strength of Annexure- AII, judgment. Learned Counsel submitted that the substratum of prosecution case is destroyed by Annexure-AII, judgment. Learned Counsel also submitted that proceeding against 4th accused was quashed as per order dated December 9, 2004 in Crl.M.C. No. 3231 of 2004. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also.

I have gone through Annexure-AII, judgment. It is seen that CW2/injured and four other witnesses to the incident were examined. None of them supported the prosecution. PW2, the injured stated that he was attacked by more than 10 to 12 persons but, he could not identify them. He denied that he had named his assailants to the police. He further stated that the case is settled between him and others and that he has no complaint against the accused. It is in the above circumstances that those accused faced trial in S.C. No. 470 of 2001 were acquitted.

It is seen from Annexure-AII, judgment that the injured was not able to identify any of the assailants. He stated that he could not identify any of the 10 to 12 persons who attacked him. He denied giving the name of assailants to the police. It is seen that this Court in Crl.M.C. No. 3231 of 2004 acting upon Annexure-AII, judgment quashed the case against the 4th accused. There is no reason why a different stand should be taken against Petitioner/accused No. 10. I am inclined to allow this petition.

Resultantly this criminal miscellaneous case is allowed. Final report in Crime No. 183 of 1995 of Anthikad Police Station, cognizance taken and proceeding against Petitioner/accused No. 10 in C.P. No. 16 of 2001 of the Court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thrissur are quashed.