Where proceedings against co-accused have been quashed by a Co-ordinate Bench due to the absence of incriminating evidence or material, the principle of parity warrants that other accused individuals similarly situated should also be granted relief to prevent the abuse of the process of law.

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY RESPONDENT NO.1, WHITEFIELD CRN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY, AGAINST THE PETITIONER (RAJ LALIT SONI-ACCUSED NO.5) IN CR.NO.453/2022 (LEADING TO CC.NO.29575/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XLVII ACJM, BANGALORE,) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 66, 66B, 66C, 66D OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000, AND SEC. 120B, 201, 419, 420 R/W 149 OF IPC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner/accused No.6 is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.29575/2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ('the Act' for short) and Sections 120(B), 201, 419, 420 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for short).

2. Heard Sri. Omkar Basava Prabhu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. B. Pushpalatha, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits qua-accused Nos.1, 8 and 16, a Co-ordinate Bench in Crl.P.No.8975/2022 disposed on 13.01.2023, in the very same C.C.No.29575/2022 has quashed the proceedings. The order of quashment qua accused Nos.1, 8 and 16 was tossed before the Apex Court only to be dismissed and the order of the Co-ordinate Bench has attained finality. Therefore, on the observations made by the Co-ordinate Bench, the petitioner who stands on the same footing of accused Nos.1, 8 and 16, would be entitled to the same relief, as is granted by the Co-ordinate Bench.

4. Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would refute the submissions to contend that the petitioner has to face the trial and the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be quashed on the same observations made in the order of the Co-ordinate Bench. She would submit that the role of the petitioner is different from that of the accused Nos.1, 8 and 16.

5. The Co-ordinate Bench in Crl.P.No.8975/2022 and connected matter disposed on 13.01.2023 as held as follows:

"The Crl.P.No.8975/2022 filed by the petitioner accused Nos.1, 8 and 16 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.29575/2022 pending on the file of I ACMM, Bengaluru registered by CEN police in Crime No.453/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 419, 420 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 66, 66(C)(D) of Information Technology Act, 2000.

The Crl.P.No.8708/2022 filed by the petitioner accused Nos.1, 7, 6, 11 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in Crime No.454/2022 registered by the Whitefiled CEN police, for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 419, 420 read with Section 149 of IPC and Sections 66, 66(C)(D) of Information Technology Act 2000.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned SPP for respondent No.1.

3. Both the cases are arising out of the same offence said to be committed by the accused persons and filed at two different officers belonging to different police stations to the same CEN police and the complaint registered before the Whitefield CEN police one after the another on 08.07.2022 in Crime No.453/2022 at 12 P.M. against the same accused persons and Crime No.454/2022 at 12.30 P.M. filed by the Whitefield police officer. The allegation is one and same and the accused company and persons are one and same, except one of the accused No.7 in Crl.P.No.8708/2022 (in Crime No.454