Sri Ravikumar S/O Venkataiah vs State Of Karnataka on 4 April, 2013

[Cites 11, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Ravikumar S/O Venkataiah vs State Of Karnataka on 4 April, 2013

Bench: H.N.Nagamohan Das

                               - 1 -




   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

       DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013

                            BEFORE

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

           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1831/2013

Between:
Mohammad
S/o Abdul Khadar
Aged about 29 years
R/at Sahanaz Manzil
Dharmanagara Village
Mangalore
D.K. - 575001.                                    .... Petitioner
(By Sri R.B.Deshpande, Adv.,)
And:
The State of Karnataka
By Ullal Police Station
Mangalore
D.K. - 575001.                                    .... Respondent
(By Sri K.Nageshwarappa, GP.,)

      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the entire proceedings against the
petitioner in C.C.No.3362/2009 pending on the file of the
J.M.F.C. (III Court), Mangalore, D.K.

      This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this
day, the Court made the following:

                     Corrected vide court order
                      on IA.2/13 dt.2.12.13
                                - 2 -




                              ORDER

Respondent police registered the case in Crime No.234/2006 for the offences punishable under section 143, 147, 148, 448, 436, 427, 186, 188 R/w 149 of IPC and under Section 2(b) of Karnataka Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act. After investigation a split charge sheet was filed in SC No.79/2008 and 85/2009 against 56 accused. On contest the III Additional District and Session Judge, D.K., Mangalore vide judgment dated 25/5/2010 acquitted all the accused. Now a Split charge sheet is filed against the petitioner/Accused No.1 in C.C.No.3362/2009. Before the Trial Court petitioner entered appearance and he is enlarged on bail.

2. The petitioner is before this court seeking extension of the benefit of acquittal in SC No.79/2008 and 85/2009. The prosecution is relaying on the same set of evidence against the petitioner. The Session Judge by appreciating the very same evidence acquitted the other accused in SC No.79/2008 and 85/2009. It is not shown to me by the prosecution that they are relaying on additional

- 3 -

evidence to proceed against the petitioner/accused No.1. In view of the law declared by the Apex Court in (2007) 15 Supreme Court Cases 305, Deepak Rajak v. State of W.B the petitioner is entitled for extension of benefit of acquittal.

Accordingly, I pass the following order:

ORDER

i) Petition is hereby allowed.

ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.3362/2009 against the petitioner pending on the file of Jurisdictional Magistrate are hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE Corrected vide court order on IA.2/13 dt.2.12.13 SM

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court