Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
"The petitioner - accused No.6 is knocking at the
doors of this Court in the subject petition calling in
question a split charge sheet drawn against him in
S.C.No.96/2022 registered for offences punishable
under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC.
2. Heard Sri. Lakshmikanth K., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Sowmya R.,
learned HCGP appearing for the respondents.
3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
On the night of 14.02.2015, an alleged incident leads
the petitioner along with others for registration of a
crime for offences punishable under Sections 399 and
Crl.P.No.5376/2024 dated 19.09.2024
NC: 2026:KHC:16232
HC-KAR
402 of the IPC in Crime No.306/2015. The petitioner is
arrayed as accused No.6. The police after investigation
file a charge sheet in the said matter and the
concerned Court registers S.C.No.423/2015. The
petitioner - accused No.6 at the relevant point in time
was not available for trial and therefore, the concerned
Court tried the other accused and acquitted them on
the score that the prosecution has failed to prove the
guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. On account of non-
availability of the petitioner, the concerned Court draws
up a split charge sheet in S.C.No.96/2022 and now is
wanting to continue the trial for the aforesaid offences.
"The petitioner is the accused in the case
and he is shown to be the absconding. Therefore,
the case against the petitioner was split up and
charge-sheet was laid against other available
accused Nos.1 and 3 for committing an offence
punishable under Sections 498A and 307 IPC r/w
34 Indian Penal Code, 1860. After the trial, the
Sessions Judge acquitted the accused Nos.1 to 3.
The petitioner was arrested and proceedings were
revived against him in the split charge sheet.... In
the instant case also, the full pledged trial was
held against accused Nos.1 to 3, in respect of the
same offence. In the second round of trial against
the petitioner, the evidence to be produced cannot
be different from the one that was produced by
the prosecution in the earlier case. Therefore, in
that view of the matter, the proceeding is
quashed."
ii) The impugned FIR and Charge Sheet in
Crime No.7/2018 registered by the respondent - police
(Main S.C.No.51/2019 C/w S.C.No.83/2021 and
S.C.No.95/2021) split up charge sheet in
S.C.No.142/2021 on the file of the III Addl. District &
Sessions Judge, Mangaluru, for the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 147, 120B, 448, 109,
114, 302, 212 r/w Section 149 of IPC insofar as the