Mohammed Ali @ Delhi vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 December, 2013

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Mohammed Ali @ Delhi 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. 7540/2013

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

Sri. MOHAMMED ALI @ DELHI
S/O. SABULAL
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
MUBARAK MOHALLA
CHAMARAJANAGARA TOWN & DIST.
NOW R/A. DOOR No. 12/52
2ND CROSS, K P MOHALLA
CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN & DIST.
PIN 571 313.                               ... PETITIONER

(BY Sri. R K MAHADEVA, ADV.)

AND :
--------


1.         THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
           REP. BY THE STATION HOUSE
           OFFICER, CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN
           POLICE STATION, CHAMARAJANAGAR
           TOWN & DIST., 571 313.
                                        2




2.     Sri. RAVI
       S/O. LATE BANGARA NAIKA
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
       R/A. DOOR No. 373
       MEGALA NAIKARA BEEDHI
       CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN
       PIN 571 313.            ... 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 IN S.C. No. 84/2013 (ARISING OUT OF CRIME
No. 140/2007) OF CHAMARAJANAGAR TOWN P.S. AND ETC.

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

                              ORDER

Petitioner is accused No. 10 in crime No. 140/2007 for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 324, 307 read with Section 149 IPC. Since the petitioner was absconding a split charge sheet was filed against other accused in S.C. No. 30/2009. On contest the Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Kollegal, vide judgment dated 27.10.2009, acquitted other accused. On tracing the petitioner he is arrested and split charge sheet is filed 3 against him in S.C. No. 84/2013. Petitioner is now in custody. Petitioner contends that the prosecution is relying on the same set of evidence which they have relied in S.C. No. 30/2009. It is not shown to me as to what is the difference in the evidence against the petitioner. In the absence of any such difference in evidence the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of acquittal of other accused. 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 S.C. No. 84/2013 arising out of Cr.No.140/2007 registered by Chamarajanagar Town Police Station are hereby quashed.

iii. Petitioner to be released forthwith.

Sd/-

JUDGE.

LRS.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court