SHAKEEL AHAMMADA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

The petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.1 in Criminal Case No.420/2016 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM,

Mangaluru, D.K., has filed this petition seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C.No.261/2017 filed against him on the basis of the split up

chargesheet (arising out of the Crime No.172/2015) by Surathkal Police, which is pending on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM,

Mangaluru, D.K.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader.

The records disclose that a criminal case has been lodged by the respondent-Police i.e. Surathkal Police, Mangaluru, originally against four

accused persons in C.C.No.420/2016. Out of four accused, case against accused No.1, the present petitioner was split up and a separate case

was registered against him in C.C.No.260/2017. However, accused Nos. 2 to 4 were tried in the said case and by judgment dated 11th October

2017, accused Nos. 2 to 4 were acquitted of the charges levelled against them for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 341, 323, 325,

354 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC.

The learned counsel for petitioner submits that the allegations made against all the accused persons 1 to 4 in the said case are similar and are

inseparable and indivisible in nature. Therefore, the benefit of judgment of acquittal shall also be extended to the present petitioner.

In this regard, in my opinion, it is worth to note here a decision of the Apex Court reported in AIR 2005 SC 268 in the case of Central Bureau

of Investigation Vs. Akhilesh Singh, wherein, it was held that:

Quashing of charge and discharge of the accused when an accused who alleged to have hatched conspiracy and who had motive to kill the

deceased were already discharged, that matter had attained finality, the discharge of co-accused by High Court by holding that no purpose would

be served in further proceeding with case against coaccused held proper.

In another decision reported in 2002(1) KCCR 1 in the case of Muneer Ahmed Qureshi, Muneer @ Gaun Muneer Vs. State of Karnataka by

Kumarswamy Layout Police, wherein this Court has held that: -

Entire case of the prosecution as against six accused is practically inseparable and individual one and especially when the Judgment of acquittal is

passed, when P.W.1 denies the entire incident or the role of the accused. This reasoning of acquittal would also definitely enure to the petitioner.

Even if the petitioner is tried there cannot be any other material other than what is already produced and considered by Trial Court. In such

circumstances it will be an exercise in futility to make the petitioner to undergo the ordeal of crime, and then to be acquitted.

Holding that the proceeding against the accused person who was absconding and subsequently against whom a split up charge sheet was filed was

quashed.

In view of the above said decisions, it is crystal clear that if the allegations against the accused persons and co- accused who were tried and

acquitted by the Court are one and the same and they are not separable in nature and the prosecution has already led evidence in one of the case

and the said evidence projected by the prosecution was also in respect of the absconding accused and there is no separate or better evidence that

can be produced by the prosecution, in such an event, the Court can quash said proceeding against the accused who was not available for the trial.

In this background, it is worth to refer the factual matrix of this case in C.C.No.420/2016. In the chargesheet, the allegations made against the

accused persons are as follows:

It is the case of the prosecution that on 21.9.2015 at about 9.15 hours, accused Nos. 1 to 4 with common intention to commit an offence against

the complainant by name one Rafeeq, when the complainant was moving on his scooter bearing Registration No.KA.19.EM.1463 in front of site

No.167, situated at Block No.9, Katipalla village, Mangaluru Taluk, it is alleged that all the accused persons 1 to 4 have abused CW1 and

quarrelled with each other and in fact, the accused persons have wrongfully restrained him and assaulted him with their hands and also tried to

outrage the modesty of PWs 1 and 2. On the aforesaid allegations, the charge sheet has been filed.

The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused 2 to 4 examined 5 witnesses as PWs 1 to 5 and got marked Exs.P1 to P11.

Ultimately, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Court has recorded its finding that the prosecution has not placed

sufficient material to arrive at a conclusion as to the guilt of the accused and therefore, the Court has acquitted accused Nos. 2 to 4. Therefore,

when the Trial Court has meticulously examined the evidence available on record and recorded the finding of acquittal against the accused and

when particularly, the State has not chosen to prefer any appeal against the said judgment of acquittal in C.C.No.420/2016, in my opinion, the

benefit of said acquittal order is equally be extended to the accused persons who are split up from the case and consequently, all proceedings

deserves to be quashed. Otherwise, continuation of proceeding against the accused amounts to abuse of process of Court and it would also loss of

valuable time of the Court. Hence, I pass the following:

ORDER

Petition is allowed. Consequently, the case in C.C.No.260/2017 (arising out of Crime No.172/2015) pending on the file of I Additional Senior

Civil Judge and CJM, Mangaluru, D.K. and all further proceedings therein are hereby quashed.