ABDUL VAHID Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the 7th accused in Crime No.488 of 1992 of Kayamkulam Police Station, L.P.No.14 of 1998 of the court of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kayamkulam and S.C.No.857 of 2009 of the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mavelikara for offences punishable under Secs.143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 307 r/w Sec.149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, "the IPC"). Accused 2 to 5 and 8 were acquitted in S.C.No.62 of 2005. The first accused surrendered and he was tried in S.C.No.123 of 2006. He was acquitted by Annexure-I, judgment for want of sufficient evidence to implicate him in the alleged incident. While pronouncing Annexure-I, judgment learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that "In the result the accused 1 to 8 are not found guilty for the offence punishable u/s.143, 147, 148, 323, 324, 307 and 149 IPC and they are acquitted for the said offences u/s.232 of Cr.P.C. cancelling their bail bond, I direct that they be set at liberty." PETITIONER is now being prosecuted in S.C.No.857 of 2009. PETITIONER wants proceeding against him to be quashed on the principle of issue estoppel. It is contended by learned counsel that though petitioner had not participated in the trial, petitioner also has been acquitted by Annexure-I, judgment having regard to the nature of evidence given by the witnesses and hence trial of petitioner is not warranted. I have heard learned Public Prosecutor as well.

(2.) CWS.1 to 3 are the injured. CW4 is an independent witness. CWS.1 and 4 expired even before trial leading to Annexure-I, judgment. CWS.2 and 3 were examined as PWs.1 and 2. In the course of trial, PWs.1 and 2 and the accused (who faced trial) filed a petition to compound the offences. Learned Sessions Judge dismissed that petition since some of the offences were not compoundable. Learned Sessions Judge observed that PWs.1 and 2 did not support the prosecution. They claimed that they settled the case with the accused. Though they referred to the incident, claimed that they could not identify the assailants. Noting these circumstance, learned Additional Sessions Judge passed Annexure-I judgment acquitting accused 1 to 8 under Sec.232 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.