Shaukath Ali vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 December, 2013

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shaukath Ali vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 December, 2013

Bench: H.N. Nagamohan Das

                                    1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

              DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013

                                BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.N. NAGAMOHAN DAS

                  CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7490/2013

BETWEEN :
---------------

1.         Sri. SHAUKATH ALI
           S/O. KHALANDER SAB
           AGED 34 YEARS
           C/O. SUB-INSPECTOR
           SHEKARAIAH
           7TH CROSS, IUDP LAYOUT
           CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

2.         Sri. INAYATH
           S/O. MOHAMMED SHAFIULLA
           AGED 30 YEARS
           R/O. ANJANAMURTHY ROAD
           HOSPETE
           CHITRADURGA TOWN - 577 0501.    ... PETITIONERS

(BY Sri. PRASAD B S, ADV.)

AND :
--------

1.         THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
           BELLAVI POLICE STATION - 572 107.
                                      2




2.    Sri. PANDITH SHRINIVAS
      S/O. SUBBARAV
      AGED 65 YEARS
      R/O. BELLAVI
      TUMKUR TQ. & DIST. 572 107.               ... RESPONDENTS

(BY Sri. K NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP, FOR R-1)


      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 Cr.P.C. WITH A PRAYER TO QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS PENDING
ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. C.J. (Jr.Dn.) AND JMFC, TUMKUR
IN C.C. No. 41/2007 AND ETC.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING;

                            ORDER

Petitioners are accused Nos. 2 and 3 in crime No. 28/2005 for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 448, 307 read with Section 149 IPC. Since the petitioners were absconding a split charge sheet was filed against accused No. 1 in S.C. No. 26/2007. On contest the Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 14.12.2010, acquitted accused No. 1. On tracing the petitioners they are arrested and split charge sheet is filed against them in C.C. No. 41/2007. 3 Petitioners are now in custody. Petitioners contend that the prosecution is relying on the same set of evidence which they have relied on in S.C. No. 26/2007. It is not shown to me as to what is the difference in the evidence against the petitioners. In the absence of any such difference in evidence the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of acquittal of accused No. 1. In identical circumstances the Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Rajak Vs. State of W.B. (2007) 15 SCC 305 held as under:

"A departure may be made in cases where the accused had not surrendered after the conviction in addition to not filing an appeal against the conviction. But as in the present case, after surrender, the benefit of acquittal in the case of co-accused on similar accusations can be extended."

2. In view of the above, the following;

ORDER i. Petition is hereby allowed.

ii. Proceedings in C.C. No. 41/2007 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Tumkur, insofar as the petitioners are concerned, are hereby quashed. iii. Petitioners are to be released forthwith.

Sd/-

JUDGE.

LRS.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court