SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 31239

- 1 -

CRL.P No. 6966 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6966 OF 2022

BETWEEN:

1.

BHADRA @ VEERABADRAIAH

S/O C S NAGARAJAPPA,

AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

R/AT ITTAMADU, BENGALURU-560085

PRESENTLY R/AT NO.70,

HUNASAVADI VILLAGE,

PURAVARA HOBLI,

MADHUGIRI TALUK,

TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572175

&PETITIONER

(BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR G H., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

STATE OF KARNATAKA

SUBRAMANYAPURA P S,

REPRESENTED BY SPP

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

HIGH COURT BUILDING,

BANGALORE-560001

&RESPONDENT

Digitally signed by

PADMAVATHI B K

Location: HIGH

COURT OF

KARNATAKA

- 2 -

CRL.P No. 6966 of 2022

(BY SRI. K.S. ABHIJITH, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE

FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE

PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.1671/2021 ON THE FILE OF LXIII

ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU

(CCH-64), PENDING AGAINST THIS PETITIONER FOR AN

OFFENCE P/U/S 399 AND 402 OF IPC.

THIS PETITION COMING ON ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE

COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

Heard the learned counsel, Sri. G.H. Ravikumar,

appearing for the petitioner and Sri. K.S. Abhijith, learned

HCGP appearing for the respondent - State.

2.

The petitioner is before this Court calling in

question

the

proceedings

in

S.C.No.1671/2021

for

offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the

IPC. The petitioner is accused No.6. On 19.01.2017, the

respondent - police register a crime in Crime No.27/2017

against 8 persons for offences punishable under Sections

399 and 402 of the IPC. The police after investigation file a

charge sheet and the case was then registered as

C.C.No.23797/2017

and

on

its

committal,

becomes

S.C.No.1343/2019.

- 3 -

3.

By an order dated 31.07.2018, after a full

blown trial, the concerned court acquits accused Nos.1 to

4 of the offences so laid against them, which were the

ones punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC.

Insofar as the present petitioner is concerned, he was not

available for trial at the relevant point in time, when

accused Nos.1 to 4 were tried and a split charge sheet

against the petitioner was laid in S.C.No.1671/2021 and is

now sought to be tried in S.C.No.1671/2021 for the very

offences that were alleged against all the 8 accused i.e.,

the ones punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the

IPC. It is the continuance of the trial that drives the

petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the allegations against all the accused are the

same and after a full blown trial, accused Nos.1 to 4 were

acquitted and the petitioner is now sought to be continued

on account of his absence during the trial and on the

strength of a split charge that is made as aforesaid and

- 4 -

submits that the proceedings ought to be quashed, as the

evidence that would be brought before the Court in

S.C.No.1343/2017 would be the same, this was considered

and rejected by the concerned Court while acquitting

accused Nos.1 to 4.

5.

Learned HCGP

would

however refute the

submission to contend that the petitioner would escape

trial, should necessarily face trial and considered for

acquittal by the concerned Court and this Court should not

interfere at this juncture, as a person, who has escaped

trial, should not be shown any indulgence under section

482 of Cr.P.C .

6.

I have given my anxious consideration to the

respective submissions made by the learned counsel and

have perused the material on record.

7.

The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The

solitary incident of preparation for commission of dacoity

as obtaining under Section 399 or 402 Cr.P.C. becomes a

crime in Crime No.27/2017 against 8 accused. All the 8

- 5 -

accused were alleged of the same offence. Accused Nos.5

to 8 were not available for trial at the point when the trial

was taken up and split charge sheet was issued against

them. After a full blown trial, accused Nos.1 to 4 were

acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge on 31.07.2018.

The reasons rendered by the learned Sessions Judge for

acquitting accused Nos.1 to 4 are as follows:

"14. PW.1 is the complainant of this case. He

clearly stated before Court regarding receipt of

information, securing of his staff and panchas

and went to the spot, conducted raid, arrested

accused No.1 to 4 and recovered MOs.1 to 4

from the spot. Then he returned to the police

station and handed over the accused persons,

seized material objections, mahazar and report

to the S.H.O. of their police station.

15. PW.2 has also given evidence in the line of

PW.2 stating he accompanied PW.1 in the raid.

PW.3 is the P.S.I., who received complaint from

CW.1. He stated before the Court that on

19.01.2017,

at

about

3.30

p.m.,

A.S.I.,

Krishnamurthy/PW.1 produced accused No.1 to

4, seized material objects and mahazar and gave

- 6 -

report. Then he registered case in Cr.No.27/2017

against the accused persons of the offence

punishable U/Secs.399 and 402 of IPC and sent

F.I.R. to the Court. Thereafter, he subjected the

seized materials object to P.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top