Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Sunil @ Chikka Sunil S/o Nagaraju – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the continuation of proceedings against him in C.C.No.7653/2016 for an offence punishable under Section 397 of the IPC.
2. Heard Sri. Rajashekara R.V., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Addl. SPP for respondent No.1 and have perused the material on record.
3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
The petitioner along with others gets embroiled in a crime in Crime No.542/2015 for the aforesaid offence. The police after investigation, file a charge sheet in C.C.No.17204/2015. The petitioner at the relevant point in time was not available for trial. Accused Nos.1 to 4 were tried in S.C.No.490/2016 and against the petitioner, a separate split charge was directed to be framed on account of his absence during the trial. It transpires that the concerned Court, by its judgment dated 25.07.2018, acquits accused Nos.2 and 3 who were tried on the score that the prosecution has failed to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. Since the offence is the one punishable under Section 397 of the IPC, which would be a collective act, the petitioner, if even permitted to be tried, at this junc
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 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 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 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.
The acquittal of co-accused does not automatically warrant quashing of charges against an absconding accused; trials may proceed if evidence against absconders remains.
The court affirmed that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC should be exercised sparingly, emphasizing that acquittal of a co-accused does not automatically warrant quashing proceedings....
The acquittal of a co-accused does not automatically entitle other accused to quash proceedings; each case must be evaluated on its own merits.
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
