The petitioner herein is the original 3rd accused in Crime No. 254/1996 of the Nadapuram Police Station. In the said crime, the police submitted final report against seven accused. The case against the other six accused was initially committed, and the said case was tried as S.C. No. 189/2004 in the Court of Session, Kozhikode. In the said case, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Vadakara acquitted the accused Nos.4 and 5 under Section 232 Cr.P.C., and split up the case against the others. The case against those four accused was later quashed by this Court as per order dated 30.06.2008 in Crl.M.C.No.1635/08. In S.C.No.189/04, the accused Nos. 4 and 5 obtained judgment of acquittal under Section 232 Cr.P.C., when all the material witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution. Finding that the prosecution cannot, in any manner, improve the case in such a situation, this Court quashed the prosecution as against the others, except the petitioner herein. The case of the petitioner Crl.M.C.. No. 6395/2014 2 herein was later committed to the Court of Session, as per the committal order in C.P.No.38/2004. It was filed in the Court of Session as S.C. No. 667/2008, and the case now stands transferred to the register of long pending cases as L.P. No. 7/2010. The petitioner now seeks orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashing the prosecution as against him, on the ground that continuance of prosecution in the present circumstance will not serve any purpose, other than wasting the precious time of the court. 2. On a perusal of Annexure-B judgment of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Vadakara, and Annexure-C order of this Court in Crl.M.C.No.1635/2008, I find that two of the accused obtained a judgment of acquittal, and four others obtained orders under Section 482 Cr.P.C., quashing the prosecution, on the ground that the material witnesses did not, in any manner, support the prosecution at the initial stage. This Court found the possibility of nobody supporting the prosecution, when four of the accused brought application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I find that in such a factual situation whether the whole proceeding as Crl.M.C.. No. 6395/2014 3 against the other six accused stands closed, continuance of prosecution as against the petitioner herein will be a sheer waste of time. It will not serve any purpose, other than wasting the precious time of the court. No doubt, nobody will, in any manner, support the prosecution, and the prosecution cannot in any manner improve the case, if it goes to trial. I find, accordingly, that this prosecution also can be quashed.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The prosecution as against the petitioner herein in S.C. No. 667/2008 of the Court of Sessions, Kozhikode (Assistant Sessions Court, Vadakara) which now stands transferred to the register of long pending cases as L.P. No.7/2010, will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the petitioner will stand released from prosecution.
Sd/-
P. UBAID, JUDGE sd // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE