Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Dilipa @ Putta, S/o. Late Subbanna – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, The Police Inspector K.G. Nagara Police Station, Rep. By State Public Prosecutor High Court Of Karnataka, Bengaluru – Respondent
ORDER :
(S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.)
In this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.18059/2013 arising out of FIR in Crime No.27/2012 registered by Kempegowda Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, pending on the file of I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record would indicate that the petitioner – Dilipa @ Putta was arraigned as accused No.6 along with 5 others, who were arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 5 in the charge sheet in CC.No.23444/2012 pursuant to FIR in Crime No.27/2012. The offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under Sections 399 and 402 of IPC.
4. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the judgment dated 20.02.2016 passed in S.C.No.1413/2013 as against accused Nos.2, 3 and 5 in order to point out that in view of the acquittal of the aforesaid accused, the petitioner who is accused No.6, prior to same being split up, would be entitled to seek parity
The acquittal of co-accused on similar charges allows for quashing proceedings against the petitioner due to the lack of independent evidence, promoting judicial efficiency.
The acquittal of co-accused on similar charges entitles the petitioner to quash proceedings against him due to the principle of parity, necessitating a lack of independent evidence.
The acquittal of co-accused leads to the quashing of proceedings against a petitioner when the charges are identical and no independent evidence supports further prosecution.
The acquittal of co-accused necessitates the quashing of charges against similarly situated accused, reinforcing the doctrine of parity in criminal proceedings.
The doctrine of parity applies, allowing for the quashing of proceedings against an accused when co-accused have been acquitted on similar charges.
In the absence of independent evidence against an accused where co-accused have been acquitted, proceedings should be quashed to uphold judicial efficiency.
The acquittal of a co-accused does not automatically entitle other accused to quash proceedings; each case must be evaluated on its own merits.
Mere acquittal of co-accused persons in a separate trial is not a sufficient ground to quash the proceeding against another accused, especially when there is prima facie material available against th....
Accused cannot be prosecuted where co-accused are acquitted on identical charges without independent evidence, as it violates principles of justice and due process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
