Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Joseph S/o Narayanappa – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"c. Quash the entire proceedings in matter bearing C.C.No.59464/2018, Of K.R. Puram Police Station pending on the file of the Hon'ble XXIX Additional Chief judicial Magistrate at Bangalore city Mayohall as against the petitioner herein; wherein, the arraigned as accused No.4 for the alleged offences under section 399 & 402 of Indian Penal code.
d. Pass any such order/s as may be just and necessary in the best interest of justice."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner along with 7 others, is arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 8 in the impugned proceedings in S.C.No.48/2019 instituted by respondent No.1 pursuant to the complaint given by respondent No.2 for offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC .
4. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 - Naveen Kumar and Kiran Kumar approached this Court in Crl.P.No.9107/2025, which was allowed and disposed of vide final order dated 25.07.2025 quashing the impugned
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 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 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 a co-accused does not automatically entitle other accused to quash proceedings; each case must be evaluated on its own merits.
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.
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....
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
