AVINASH THAMPAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner faces indictment for offences punishable interalia under Section 326 read with 149 I.P.C. Altogether there were nineteen accused persons. The petitioner is the seventeenth accused. The petitioner was not available for trial. The trial against the co-accused was proceeded with. Crucial witnesses examined before court in the trial against the co- accused turned hostile to the prosecution. Consequently, the learned Magistrate found such accused not guilty and acquitted them. The petitioner did not stand trial and has shown as absconding. The case against him has been split up. The petitioner has now come to this court with this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings which is surviving against him.

(2.) What is the reason? Except that the co-accused have already been acquitted and that the witnesses who were examined in the course of the trial turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case, no other contentions are raised. The mere acquittal of the co-accused is, by itself, no reason to justify the prayer of the absconding co-accused to quash the proceedings against him. This position has been clarified in the decision of the Full Bench in Moosa vs. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552 (FB)].

(3.) I have looked into the factual situation also. One of the injured persons was not available for trial when the co- accused stood trial. May be the co-accused are entitled for the advantage of the failure of the prosecution to produce such witness. Certainly, the absconding co-accused cannot claim any benefit or advantage from that circumstance. In these circumstances, the prayer cannot obviously be entertained. The petition has to fail.