Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
Arjun @ Kulla S/o Anna Dorai – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
1. In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
"a. Quash the entire proceedings in matter bearing C.C.No.19710/2018 of Sampangi Ramangar Police Station pending in the file of the Hon'ble XLVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore City as against the petitioner herein; wherein, the petitioner herein is arraigned as accused No.6 for the alleged offences under section 341, 504, 307 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code.
b. 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 5 others, is arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 6 in the impugned proceedings in S.C.No.1515/2018 instituted by respondent No.1 pursuant to the complaint given by respondent No.2 for offences punishable under Sections 341 , 504, 307 read With Section 149 of the IPC .
4. Accused No.3 - Ajay approached this Court in Crl.P.No.7217/2025, which was allowed and disposed of vide final
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 necessitates the quashing of charges against similarly situated accused, reinforcing the doctrine of parity in criminal proceedings.
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 a co-accused does not automatically entitle other accused to quash proceedings; each case must be evaluated on its own merits.
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....
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.
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
