SIDDIQUE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under the provisions of the Kerala Abkari Act. The alleged incident has taken place on 24/5/2004. Accused 1 and 2 were allegedly found transporting large quantity of illicit spirit in a vehicle belonging to the petitioner/third accused. Investigation is complete. Charge sheet has already been filed. The petitioner was initially not available for trial. This obliged the court to split up the case and to commit the co- accused for trial. Consequent to the subsequent apprehension by the petitioner, his case has also been committed to the court of Session. Charges have been framed by the court of Session, it is submitted. The matter stands listed for trial to 06/06/2007. It is at this stage that the petitioner has come to this court during the vacation on 19/04/2007 for quashing the proceedings.

(2.) It is stated that the court has framed the charges against the petitioner. Obviously this must have been done after hearing the petitioner. The order framing charge is not challenged. The contention is that the petitioner has nothing to do with the vehicle on the relevant date and therefore the petitioner is entitled for quashing of proceedings against him.

(3.) This certainly is a contention which could have been raised at the time of framing charges. That has not been done. Instead, at the eleventh hour, the petitioner has come rushing to this court and I find absolutely no justification to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C and quashing the proceedings. Obviously the charge in S.C.No.71/06 against the co-accused and S.C.No.314/06 against the petitioner are being consolidated and joint trial is being held. The petitioner can, of course, make a request to that effect.