POTTENGAL ABOOBACKER Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The important question that came up for consideration was whether the Public Prosecutor who was not in charge of the case was competent to file a request for withdrawal from the prosecution under S.321 Cr.P.C.

(2.) Out of the eleven accused arrayed in C.C. No. 22/95 pending before the Additional Sessions Court (Fast Track - I), Manjeri, nine were facing the trial for offences under S.143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 326 and 307 read with S.149 IPC. Two of the accused were not available for trial and the case against them was splited. Twelve witnesses were examined as PWs. 1 to 12 and the case stood posted for questioning the accused under S.313 Cr.P.C. At that stage the Public Prosecutor who was not in charge of the case filed a request for withdrawal from the prosecution. The court below rejected the above request saying that it was a belated one. The nine accused who were facing the trial filed Crl.R.P. No. 1309/2002 and the State filed Crl.R.P. No. 1517/2002 challenging the above order.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioners in Crl.R.P. 1309/02 viz., the accused, one of the de facto complainant (the injured who was impleaded as per order in Crl.M.P. 7595/02) and also the learned Public Prosecutor.