Kerala High Court
Shaik Abdul Abees vs State Of Kerala on 25 February, 2026
Crl.MC No. 8004 of 2025
2026:KER:17199
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 6TH PHALGUNA,
1947
CRL.MC NO. 8004 OF 2025
CRIME NO.1973/2016 OF Ranni Police Station, Pathanamthitta
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN SC NO.995 OF
2018 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT - III,
PATHANAMTHITTA / III ADDITIONAL MACT
PETITIONER:
SHAIK ABDUL ABEES
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O SHAIK IBRAHIM, DOOR NO NO. 12/88 JAGAIPETT,
KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRAPRADESH., PIN - 521175
BY ADV SMT.K.DEEPA (PAYYANUR)
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY, PIN - 682031
PP. ADV. SMT. C.SEENA
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC No. 8004 of 2025
2026:KER:17199
2
ORDER
(Dated this the 25th day of February, 2026)
The 2nd accused in SC No. 995 of 2018 on the file of
the Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Pathanamthitta arising out of
Crime No. 1973 of 2016 of Ranni Police Station filed this
petition under Section 528 BNSS praying for quashing all
further proceedings against him. The offences alleged against
the petitioner and the co-accused are under Section 304, 324
r/w 34 IPC.
2. The prosecution case is that on 29.10.2016 at
about 10.30 am, the accused persons who are the husband and
son in law of one Nazeema, aged 39 took her in a jeep from
Vijayawada, Andra Pradesh and abandoned her in front of the
Taluk hospital, Ranni and thereby they are alleged to have
committed the aforesaid offences.
3. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner,
as per Annexure A3 judgment, the learned Sessions Judge
acquitted the 1st accused for want of evidence. Therefore
according to the learned Counsel, there is no meaning in
continuing the proceedings against the petitioner. Therefore,
she prayed for quashing all further proceedings against the
Crl.MC No. 8004 of 2025
2026:KER:17199
3
petitioner.
4. The petition was strongly opposed by the learned
Public Prosecutor.
5. On a perusal of Annexure A3 judgment of the
learned Sessions Judge it is revealed that after a full fledged
trial the sessions judge acquitted the 1 st accused as the
prosecution failed to prove the charge against him. The
learned Public Prosecutor would submit that the crucial
witness CW11 could not be examined and that is why the
learned Special Judge acquitted the 1st accused.
6. It is true that in spite of coercive steps, the
prosecution failed to procure the attendance of CW11. At the
same time, the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 8 and marked
Exts.P1 to P10. After evaluating the evidence on record, the
learned Sessions Judge found that the prosecution failed to
prove the offences under Section 304, 324 r/w 34 IPC and it
was in the above context, the 1 st accused was acquitted as per
Annexure A3 judgment.
In the above circumstances, no useful purpose will be
served in continuing the proceedings against the petitioner as
the same will only be an abuse of the process of court.
Therefore, this Crl.MC is allowed. All further proceedings
Crl.MC No. 8004 of 2025
2026:KER:17199
4
against the petitioner in SC No. 995 of 2018 on the file of the
Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Pathanamthitta is quashed.
Sd/-
C. PRATHEEP KUMAR
JUDGE
AKH
Crl.MC No. 8004 of 2025
2026:KER:17199
5
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 8004 OF 2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR OF CRIME
NO.1973/2016 OF THE RANNI POLICE
STATION.
Annexure 2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT OF
CRIME NO.1973/2016 OF THE RANNI POLICE
STATION.
Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
29.06.20204 IN S.C. NO. 375/2018OF THE
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE-
III, PATHANAMTHITTA IN CRIME
NO.1973/2016 OF THE RANNI POLICE
STATION.
Annexure 4 TRUE COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE
ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDRA
PRADESH TO THE PETITIONER .
Depositions PWs 1
Depositions PWs 1 to 8
to 8