The doctrine of parity applies when co-accused are similarly placed; if criminal proceedings have been quashed against some accused due to an absence of material evidence, the benefit of such an outcome extends to other co-accused involved in the same set of facts.

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 WHITEFIELD CEN P.S. BENGALURU CITY AGAINST THE PETITIONER (RAJ LALIT SONI – ACCUSED NO.16) IN CR.NO.454/2022 (LEADING TO C.C.NO.29573/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE XLVII A.C.J.M BENGALURU) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) OF I.T ACT 2000 AND SEC.120(B), 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 S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.29573/2022 arising out of Crime No.454/2022 registered by respondent No.1 – police, pending on the file of the XLVII Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) of the IT Act, 2000 and Sections 419, 420, 201, 120(B) read with Section149 of IPC.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. SPP for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner viz., Raj Lalit Soni, was arraigned as accused No.16 in C.C.No.29573/2022 along with 31 other accused, pursuant to FIR in Crime No.454/2022. The offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under Sections 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) of the IT Act 2000 and Sections 419, 420, 201, 120(B) read with Section 149 of IPC.

4. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to an order of this Court passed in Crl.P.No.4168/2025 dated 30.06.2025 in order to point out that in view of quashment of criminal proceedings qua accused No.17, the present petitioner, who is accused No.16 in C.C.No.29573/2022 would be entitled to seek parity.

5. This Court in the case of Sri. Swapnil Rati Vs. The State of Karnataka and another – Crl.P.No.4168/2025 dated 30.06.2025, quashed the criminal proceedings qua accused No.17 (in C.C.No.29573/2022) and held as under:

In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.29573/2022 arising out of Crime No.454/2022 registered by respondent No.1 – police, pending on the file of the I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Presently XLV ACJM) for the offences punishable under Sections 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) of the IT Act 2000 and Sections 419, 420, 201, 120(B) read with Section149 of IPC.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner viz., Swapnil Rati was arraigned as accused No. 17 in C.C.No.29573/2022 along with 31 other accused, pursuant to FIR in Crime No.454/2022. The offences alleged against the petitioner and other accused are under Sections 66, 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) of the IT Act 2000 and Sections 419, 420, 201, 120(B) read with Section 149 of IPC.

4. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to an order of this Court passed Crl.P.No.8975/2022 c/w Crl.P.8708/2022 dated 13.01.2023 as against accused Nos.1, 8 and 16, in order to point out that in view of quashment of criminal proceedings qua accused Nos.1, 8 and 16, the present petitioner who is accused No.17 in C.C. No.29573/2022 would be entitled to seek parity.

5. This Court in the case of Rishi Vyas & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka – Crl.P.No.8975/2022 c/w Crl.P.8708/2022 dated 13.01.2023, quashed the criminal proceedings qua accused No.1, 8 ad 16 (in C.C.No.29575/2022) and held as under:

" ORDER

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.29575/20