Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ABDULKHADER, S/O.ABDULKARIM versus THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ABDULKHADER, S/O.ABDULKARIM v. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE - Crl MC No. 2354 of 2004 [2007] RD-KL 12936 (13 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 2354 of 2004()

1. ABDULKHADER, S/O.ABDULKARIM,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent

2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.ANIL

For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :13/07/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J.

Crl.M.C.No.2354 of 2004

Dated this the 13th day of July 2007

O R D E R

The petitioner is the first accused in a prosecution inter alia under Section 498A I.P.C. Cognizance has been taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police. The de facto complainant, in that case is the wife of the petitioner. The wife had allegedly been divorced even prior to the filing of the complaint.

2. Cognizance was taken. The petitioner was not available for trial. Accused 2 to 5 faced trial. They were found not guilty and acquitted. The petitioner has now come before this court with the prayer that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C may be invoked and the proceedings against the petitioner may be quashed in the light of the judgment acquitting the co-accused.

3. The position of law has now been settled and laid down beyond any trace of confusion or doubt by the Full Bench decision in Moosa vs. Sub Inspector of Police [2006(1) KLT 552]. It is now evident that an absconding co-accused cannot claim any benefit or advantage from the mere fact that the co-accused, who faced trial have been found not guilty and acquitted. I have gone through the judgment of acquittal of accused 2 to 5. The decision in that case is only to the effect that accused 2 to 5 are entitled to acquittal as there Crl.M.C.No.2354/04 2 is no evidence against them. No finding has been entered in that case, the advantage of which can be taken by the petitioner herein. I am, in these circumstances, satisfied that the prayer for invocation of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against the petitioner is without any basis.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a warrant of arrest is pending against the petitioner. He prays that appropriate directions may be issued in the matter.

5. There shall be a direction that the warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner shall not be executed till 23/7/2007. In the meantime, the petitioner must appear before the learned Magistrate and apply for regular bail. The learned Magistrate must consider such application for regular bail on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously - on the date of surrender itself, if such application is filed after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case.

6. This petition is dismissed with the above directions/observations.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge Crl.M.C.No.2354/04 3 Crl.M.C.No.2354/04 4

R.BASANT, J.

CRL.M.CNo.

ORDER

21ST DAY OF MAY2007


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.