ABDUL NASAR v. STATE OF KERALA
Case at a glance
- Bench
- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 336
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ss. 5, 180, 199A(1)(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 1111. Hence, I quash all proceedings in C.C No.1346/2023 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -1 Manjeri. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Sd/- Rvm Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10673/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A…
Judgment
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE EDAVANA POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN – 676123. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 2 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. ==================== Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of January, 2024 ORDER Petitioner is facing a prosecution in C.C.No.1346/2023 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-1 Manjeri arising out of Crime No.551/2023 of Edavanna Police Station. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section 336 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 apart from Section 5 read with Section 180, 199A (1)(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Prosecution alleged that the petitioner had permitted his minor son to drive a scooter bearing registration No.KL 10 AW 1741 which is registered in the name of the petitioner, rashly and negligently, thereby committing the offences alleged.
Sri. R.Ranjith (Manjeri), the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the offences alleged agianst the petitioner would not lie for more reasons than one. It was pointed out that there are no materials produced by the prosecution to prove that the petitioner’s son is a minor and thus, none of the Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 3 offences alleged would be attracted. Apart from the above, the learned counsel relied upon the judgment of this Court in Crl.M.C No.4758/2023 and Crl.M.C.No.7479/2022 to assert that since the alleged minor child of the petitioner is not being prosecuted, the offences are not attracted as against the petitioner.
Smt. Sreeja V, the learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand contended that the offences under Section 180 of the Motor Vehicles Act and Section 336 of IPC do not require the minor to be proceeded against as those two penal provisions can stand alone de hors the minor being arrayed being in conflict with law. It is however submitted that the minor has not been proceeded against in the instant case.
I have considered the rival contentions.
In the decision in Crl.M.C No.7479/2022, this Court had observed that the rashness and negligence was attributed against the driver of the vehicle only because he was a juvenile, without possessing a driving license. However the minority of the driver was not substantiated by any material on record and therefore the offences alleged were found to be not attracted, apart from the failure of the prosection to proceed against the alleged minor. Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 4
In the judgment in Crl.M.C No 4758/2023 this Court quashed the proceedings on noticing that the prosecution had failed to collect any material to show that the person who drove the vehicle was a juvenile and that he has not having a driving license.
The necessity of producing materials to show that the person who drove the vehicle is a juvenile is entirely upon the prosecution. In cases where the alleged juvenile is not being proceeded against and no proceedings have been initiated against the alleged juvenile, the prosecution will not be able to bring home the guilt of the accused.
In the instant case, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, materials are totally absent to prove the minority of the alleged juvenile, apart from the absence of any proceeding against the said juvenile. In such circumstances, the dictum laid down in the above referred judgment will apply to the facts of the present case as well.
Therefore the proceeding against the petitioner in C.C 1346/2023 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -1 Manjeri, is an abuse of the court and is liable to be quashed. Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 5
Hence, I quash all proceedings in C.C No.1346/2023 on the files of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court -1 Manjeri. This Crl.M.C is allowed as above. BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE Sd/- Rvm Crl.M.C. No.10673 of 2023 6 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10673/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO. 551/2023 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION. TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 551/2023 OF EDAVANNA POLICE STATION.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.