Zameer vs State Of Karnataka on 28 October, 2015

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Zameer vs State Of Karnataka on 28 October, 2015

Bench: Rathnakala

                              -1-



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2015

                            BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6867/2015

BETWEEN:

Zameer
S/o Rehman Sab
Aged about years
Merchant
Holalkere Town and Taluk
Chitradurga Dist.
Chitradurga-577 501.                       ...PETITIONER

(By Sri.Iqbal Ahmed Khan, Adv.)

AND:

   1. State of Karnataka
      Holalkere Town Police
      Holalkere-577 501

   2. Sri.Arun Godbole
      C.P.I.,
      Holalkere Town and Taluk
      Chitradurga Dist.-577 526.      ...RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.Vijayakumar Majage, Addl.S.P.P.)
                                  -2-



     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS PENDING AGAINST THE PETITONER
PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL
JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC., AT HOLALERE IN
C.C.NO.328/2003 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 153A, 436, 427 READ WITH SECTION 34
OF IPC BY ALLOWING THE PETITION.

    THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON                           FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE                             THE
FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

Learned Additional S.P.P. is directed to take notice for both respondents.

The petitioner along with co-accused was charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 153A, 436, 427 read with Section 149 of IPC. Since the petitioner/accused No.31 was absconding, case against him was split up. The main case ended in acquittal. Now the petitioner is put to trial on split up charge sheet.

2. I have perused the evidence recorded in the main case S.C.No.118/1998. Totally six witnesses were examined. -3- Independent witnesses turned hostile to the prosecution case. Even if the proceeding against this petitioner is allowed to continue, there cannot be any better evidence from the prosecution side. In that view of the matter, proceeding with the trial against the petitioner will be an empty formality and no purpose would be served.

Hence, the petition is allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.328/2003 pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and J.M.F.C., Holalkere, against the petitioner is hereby quashed.

In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2015 does not survive for consideration. Hence, it stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE KNM/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court