LOUIS THADAKKOTTAKARA ANTONY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is accused No.3 in Crime No.163 of 2003 of Peramangalam Police Station. He along with co-accused face allegations, inter alia, under Section 325 read with 34 I.P.C. All the other accused faced trial. They have already been found not guilty and acquitted by judgment dated 16.08.2006, a copy of which is produced as Annexure-I. The petitioner was not available for trial. The case against him has hence been split up and the same is now pending as C.C.No.1254 of 2006. The petitioner has entered appearance already, it is submitted at the Bar.

(2.) The petitioner prays that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked and the proceedings against him may be quashed. This is the short prayer. What is the reason ? The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the trial against the co-accused, the witnesses have tendered evidence only against the 1st accused and there was no evidence whatsoever against the other accused including the petitioner herein. Therefore any continuation of the trial against the petitioner alone will be needless waste of time and resources of the State and the Court. Hence it is prayed that the proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed.

(3.) That some of the witnesses have turned hostile in the trial against the co-accused, is no reason for the absconding co-accused to claim any benefit or advantage. This position has been made clear by the Full Bench in Moosa v. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552]. In the trial against the other co-accused, the witnesses did not obviously have the opportunity nor were they expected to tender evidence against the absconding petitioner. The fact that there was no evidence against the co-accused who faced trial or against the absconding petitioner in that prosecution is certainly not a good reason to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The said prayer cannot in these circumstances be accepted.