2025:KER:22462 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 CRIME NO.71/2011 OF Sreekrishnapuram Police Station, Palakkad CC NO.535 OF 2022 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS - I, OTTAPPALAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3: GOKULRAJ AGED 49 YEARS S/O K.P.MOHANDAS,SREEVIHAR, KUTHIRAVATTOM(P.O),KOZHIKODE., PIN – 673016. BY ADVS. JAGAN ABRAHAM M GEORGE JOSEPH GEORGE (KANNAMPUZHA)(K/001096/2011) JAISON ANTONY(K/000076/2017) RESPONDENT/STATE: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031. SMT. PUSHPALATHA. M.K, SR.PP. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:22462 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 2 ORDER Petitioner is the 3rd accused in C.C No.535 of 2022 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ottapalam. The case originated from Crime No.71 of 2011 registered at the Sreekrishnapuram Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 506 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The crime is registered on the allegation that out of his previous animosity towards the de facto complainant, on 19.01.2011, the 1st accused kidnapped CW1 from Sharavanamadom and the 2nd accused held him at gun point and demanded Rs.5 crores. Accused Nos.3 to 6 allegedly aided the 2nd accused in threatening the de facto complainant. 3. On submission of the final report, the case was taken on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ottapalam as C.C No.219 of 2011. Out of the 6 accused, 6th accused expired during the proceedings and all others, except 2025:KER:22462 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 3 the petitioner faced trial, and were acquitted by Annexure-III judgment. The petitioner is seeking to get the proceedings against him quashed on the strength of the judgment of acquittal rendered in the case of his co-accused. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the substratum of the prosecution case is lost by reason of the conclusive findings in Annexure-III judgment. Hence, no purpose will be served by compelling the petitioner to face trial. In support of his contention, reference is made to paragraphs 15 to 17 of the judgment. 5. I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. 6. A reading of Annexure-III judgment reveals that, after careful scrutiny of the evidence, trial court came to the definite conclusion that the ingredients of Section 363 are not attracted. In reaching such conclusion, learned Magistrate took note of the fact that, during cross-examination, de facto complainant admitted that he had voluntarily gone along with the 1st accused 2025:KER:22462 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 4 in his car. Further, PWs 2 to 4, examined as witnesses to the incident, stated that they had not accompanied the de facto complainant. The prosecution version that the 2nd accused had held the de facto complainant at gun point and demanded Rs.5 crores was disbelieved, since no complaint regarding the incident was filed immediately thereafter. The court below also took note of the delay in lodging the FIR. By reason of the above fatal infirmities in the prosecution case, the trial court was fully justified in acquitting the other accused. It is pertinent to note that, except a vague allegation that the petitioner was also present when the 2nd accused threatened the de facto complainant, there is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence. Moreover, 2nd accused himself having been acquitted, continuance of the prosecution against the petitioner will be an abuse of process of court. For the aforementioned reasons, the Crl.M.C is allowed. All further proceedings in C.C No.535 of 2022 on the files of 2025:KER:22462 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 5 the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Ottapalam, as against the petitioner, is quashed. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE Sru 2025:KER:22462 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 8740/2022 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure - I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FIR WITH NO. 71/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION, DATED 10.03.2011 Annexure- II CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT WITH NO.97/2011, FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE RESPONDENT, DATED 26.04.11 Annexure-III CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY THE HON'BLE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF 1ST CLASS I, OTTAPALAM IN C.C. NO.219L2011, DATED 30.09.2022 Annexure A4 THE DOCUMENTS EVIDENCING THE VISA OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER`S WIFE IN 4/01/2023 IS PRODUCED AS Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS EVIDENCING THE VISA OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER`S WIFE IN DATED26/9/2011 Annexure A6 THE DEPENDENTS VISAS OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER AND HIS DAUGHTER DATED26/09/2011 Annexure A7 THE EXTENSION APPLICATION SUBMITTED IN DATED 3/10/ 2013 Annexure A8 THE VISA ISSUED IN 30/10/2015 Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE CURTAILMENT LETTER DATED 22- 07-2015 FROM THE HOME OFFICE U.K IS PRODUCED Annexure A10 THE COPIES OF THE APPLICATIONS MADE BY THE PETITIONER IN DATED 20/ 10 /2015 AND 2016 Annexure A11 THE REQUISITION LETTER FROM THE HOME OFFICE UK FOR ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS IN DATED6/12/2016 Annexure A12 THE SUBMITTED COPY OF APPEAL ON 30-01-2017 IS PRODUCED AS Annexure A13 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON 03-07-2017 IS PRODUCE 2025:KER:22462 CRL.MC NO. 8740 OF 2022 7 Annexure A14 THE APPLICATION DATED 08-05-2018 IS PRODUCED A Annexure A15 THE PETITIONER IS EMPLOYED AS A DELIVERY DRIVER, WHILE HIS WIFE WORKS AS A MACHINE MINDER AT A BAKERY, WITH THEIR INCOME TAX RETURNS AND PAY SLIP DATED 06/04/2024 Annexure A16 THE MEDICAL BILLS OF THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER DATED 24/10/2021