Karnataka High Court
Shiva Nishchit vs State Of Karnataka on 3 June, 2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JUNE, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.236 OF 2021
BETWEEN
Shiva Nishchit,
S/o. Madhesha,
Aged about 23 years,
Residing at No.42,
1st Cross, Jai Lakshmipura,
Near Mahajan School,
Mysuru-570012.
...Petitioner
(By Sri. K.G.Kumara, Advocate)
AND
1. State of Karnataka by
R.T.Nagar Police Station,
Bengaluru-560032.
2. R.Prakash,
Age Major,
Police Sub Inspector,
CCB, N.T.Pete,
Bengaluru-560032.
(Represented by
Learned State Public Prosecutor,
2
High Court building,
Bengaluru-01.)
...Respondents
(By Sri Mahesh Shetty, HCGP for R1,
R2 - served)
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. praying to quash the proceedings initiated
against him in SC No.920/2020 which arising out of CC
No.23700/2012 (Crime No.259/2012) by the R.T.Nagar
Police Station, Bengaluru which is pending before the
honble LXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru (CCH 65) for the offence punishable under
Sections 120(B), 399 and 402 of IPC and under Sections
25, 26, 27(2) and 3 of Arms Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for admission this
day through video conferencing, the Court made the
following:
ORDER
Heard the petitioner's counsel and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State.
2. This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner is accused No.12 in S.C.No.920/2020 on 3 the file of the LXIV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. He is facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 402, 120(B) of IPC and Sections 25, 26, 27(2) and 3 of Arms Act.
3. It is the argument of the petitioner's counsel that split up charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and trial against accused No.1 and 10 ended in their acquittal. Since those two accused have been acquitted, the case against the petitioner is required to be quashed.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that because of the continuous absence of the petitioner before the trial Court, a split up charge sheet had to be filed and for securing presence of the petitioner, proclamation was to be issued. There are no grounds for quashing the proceedings against the petitioner.
4
5. The petitioner cannot seek quashing of the proceedings against him just because the other accused have been acquitted. Based on the evidence the trial Court has to take a decision whether to acquit or convict the petitioner. Acquittal of other two accused cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings. There are no merits in the petition. Therefore petition is dismissed.
IA No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE Kmv/-