Point of law: Quash of criminal proceedings – Dismissed - Judgment of acquittal is not admissible under Sections 40 to 43 of the Evidence Act and the benefit cannot be extended.

ORDER :

1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, praying this Court to quash the entire proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.1153/2018 (Crime No.207/2015 of Vittla Police Station, D.K. District) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 354, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of IPC pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that this petitioner, who has been arraigned as accused No.2 along with other accused in the complaint dated 18.10.2015, P.W.1 made the allegation that the neighbour by name Mohammed had constructed a petty shop in a Government Land about two months back. It is further alleged that, after the construction the persons who were sitting in the said petty shop were disturbing the residents i.e., women and children in this regard the complainant had orally informed the panchayath and revenue office and the revenue officer were removed the said petty shop about one month back. It is further alleged that, in this regard the said Mohammed, his relatives and friends were quarreled with the complainant and abused him in a filthy language. In the meantime, the Panchayath President and other leaders of the locality had agreed to resolve the dispute. That on 18.10.2015 at about 6:00 p.m, they called a meeting at Vishwakarma Community Hall in the presence of elders and leaders of the locality and in the said meeting the followers of the said Mohammed had abused the complainant in a filthy language and assaulted the complainant on all over the body. It is alleged that, the complainant had tried to escape from the place. At that time, other accused were caught hold of him and tried to press the neck of the complainant with an intention to commit the murder and pulled him on the floor. At that time, the persons who were gathered at the place were pacified them and the mother-in-law one Eshwari also tried to pacify the quarrel. At that time, one Razith and Farooq pulled her on the floor and caused injuries, she took treatment in Aadarsha Hospital. Based on the complaint, the police have registered a case for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 504, 354, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC in Crime No.207/2015. After the investigation, charge sheet is filed against 10 accused. The petitioner is the permanent resident of the above address and not aware of about filing of charge sheet against him and only when the Police came near the house with a warrant, he came to know about the pendency of the case. On Verification, he found that a case against him was split up from original C.C.No.1360/2016 by order dated 13.08.2018. The case against the other accused was tried in C.C.No.1360/2016. During the trial, the prosecution has examined two witnesses as PWs.1 and 2 and they were ultimately acquitted. Hence, the present petition is filed before this Court.

3. The grounds urged in the petition before this Court is that the learned Magistrate has framed common charge against all the accused and in the entire charge sheet there is no specific or separate charge made against the petitioner. In view of similar charge has been framed and other accused have been acquitted after the trial, there is no specific overt acts against the present petitioner and there is no recovery from the present petitioner. Hence, he is entitled for the relief of quashing.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention, he relied upon the recent Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in AIR 2021 SCC OnLine SC 56, and brought to the notice of this Court that paragraph No.9 of the judgment, wherein, the Apex Court exercised the discretion invoking Section 482 of Cr.P.C, and coming to the conclusion that neither the prosecutrix nor the complainant have levelled an iota of allegation against the appellant in respect of abduction of the prosecutrix. It