Karnataka High Court
Mr Mohammed Ansar @ Antu vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 July, 2023
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:25501
CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 11670 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
MR. MOHAMMED ANSAR @ ANTU
S/O MOHAMMED K P
AGED 33 YEARS,
R/AT NO.HAMEED MANZIL,
DOOR NO.1-39/12
BANGLE GUDDE, KUKKUNDOOR VILLAGE,
KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DIST-574104.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M R.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KARKALA TOWN POLICE STATION
KARKALA CIRCLE,
Digitally signed by UDUPI DIST-574 104
PADMAVATHI B K REPRESENTED BY ITS
Location: HIGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
COURT OF HIGH COURT BUILDING,
KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. SRI.SUDHEER RANE
S/O KISHAN
AGED 40 YEARS,
R/AT KELAMANE, KOWDOOR VILLAGE,
KARKALA TALUK
UDUPI DIST-574 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MAHESH SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:25501
CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER
WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT IN
C.C.NO.1430/2015 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 341, 342, 355, 395, 397 READ WITH SEC.34 OF
IPC ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
KARKALA, UDUPI.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this court calling in question, proceedings in C.C.No.1430/2015 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Karkala, Udupi for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 355, 395, 397 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The petitioner is accused No.8 as per charge sheet and accused No.2 as per split up charge sheet in C.C.No.1430/2015.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1.
4. Facts in brief germane as follows:
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:25501 CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022 On an incident that takes place on 10.06.2014, a crime comes to be registered against thirteen accused in Cr. No.125/2014 for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 342, 355, 395, 397 read with 34 of IPC. The police after investigation filed a charge sheet against all the accused in C.C.No.1157/2015. In so far as, it concerns the petitioner, as the petitioner was not available for trial, a split up charge sheet was laid against the petitioner in C.C.No.1430/2015.
5. What transpires later is that, the concerned Court by its order dated 12.07.2022 acquits accused No.1 to 9 in the crime. Since the petitioner was not available for the trial, at that point in time, insofar as, he was concerned, the split up charge sheet was laid and trial is now sought to be continued in the said split up charge sheet. It is this, that drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the evidence that is before the concerned Court to acquit, accused Nos.1 to 9 are, and would be the same that would be laid against the petitioner, if the trial is -4- NC: 2023:KHC:25501 CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022 permitted to continue, which eventually, will end, in an acquittal. Therefore, permitting further proceedings in the teeth of the aforesaid facts is un-warranted.
7. On the other hand, the learned HCGP would seek to refute the submissions to contend that the petitioner has escaped trial. For a person who has escaped trial, this Court should not show any indulgence and he should be led to face trial and come out clean, as the other accused have faced trial and come out clean.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by respective learned counsel and I have perused material available on record.
9. A solitary incident on 10.06.2014, results in registration of a crime against thirteen accused in Crime No.125/2014. The police after investigation, files a charge sheet against accused No.1 to 14. The petitioner at the time of the trial could not available, therefore, a split charge sheet was laid against the petitioner on 18.12.2015. The concerned Court which was trying C.C.No.1157/2015 acquits all the -5- NC: 2023:KHC:25501 CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022 other accused i.e., accused Nos.1 to 9 on the ground that the petitioner is not available, the split up charge is now sought to be tried. The reasons so rendered by the concerned Court to acquit the other accused is, as is found in paragraph Nos. 20 and 21 of the said order read as follows:
"20. PW.19 is Investigating Officer who conducted the investigation and filed charge sheet against the accused persons. He has narrated that on
10.06.2014 he took the case file from HC 865 and deposed his PSI to go to the spot of occurrence. He has deposed regarding drawing of spot mahazar, seizure of material objects, seizure mahazars, recording statement of witnesses, confession statement of the accused persons and seizure of bike, gold chain and regarding collection of evidence and finally filed charge sheet against the accused persons. In his cross-examination he has denied that PW.1 has not given the statement before him and no such witnesses gave any such statement before him and he has denied the suggestion that none of the panch witnesses signed the spot mahazar during the seizure of material objects and also denied that the accused persons never gave any confession statement before him.
-6-
NC: 2023:KHC:25501 CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022
21. On perusal entire evidence on record except PW.17 who is the Head Constable recorded the statement of the injured and registered FIR and PW.19 who filed charge against the accused persons, none of the prosecution witnesses supported the case of the prosecution. none of the panch witnesses for seizure of material objects as well as spot mahazar have supported to the case of the prosecution. Therefore, based on the evidence of PW.17 and 19 the court cannot find guilty of the prosecution. It is for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused have committed offences alleged against them. When all the independent witnesses including the panchas turned hostile to the case of prosecution, the prosecution has failed to prove the charges leveled against them for the above reasons the prosecution has failed to prove that the accused persons in furtherance of common intention to assaulted and committed docoity of CW.1 by wrongfully confining in a room. Therefore, points No.1 to 4 is answered in the Negative."
10. If the reason rendered by the concerned Court to acquit other accused i.e., 1 to 9 is noticed, it would -7- NC: 2023:KHC:25501 CRL.P No. 11670 of 2022 undoubtedly enure to the benefit of the petitioner as well. Though the petitioner has escaped trial, going by the fact that the judicial time being precious and permitting trial against the petitioner who would eventually get acquitted like others, would be a clear waste of judicial time.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.1430/2015.
12. Therefore, the petition is disposed of. The proceedings in C.C.No.1430/2015 registered for the offences punishable under Section 341, 342, 355, 395, 397 read with 34 of IPC pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Karkala, Udupi qua petitioner stand quashed.
13. In view of disposal of main petition, I.A.No.1/2022 does not survive for consideration, stands disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25