IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3975 OF 2026 BETWEEN:

MUBARAK S/O SYED BABUSAB ANWAR AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS RESIDING AT YALAHANKA ROAD M.S. PALYA, BANGALORE - 57.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATA REDDY C.M, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY YASHWANTHPUR RAILWAY POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY BENGALURU - 560 001.

Location: HIGH COURT OF …RESPONDENT KARNATAKA (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS)

PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SC.NO.1312/2011 (SC.NO.731/2021) ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.5/2011 REGISTERED BY YESHWANTHPUR RAILWAY P.S., FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 302, 201 OF IPC, THERE AFTER INVESTIGATION CHARGE SHEET HAS FILED U/S 396 OF IPC, ON THE FILE OF THE LXVII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-68).

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before the Court calling in question continuance of SC.No.1312/2011 registered for offences punishable under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for short).

2. Heard Sri. Venkata Reddy C.M., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Anoop Kumar, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

3. The petitioner gets embroiled in a crime in Crime No.5/2011 for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC. The Police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet in C.C.No.14691/2011, not for the aforesaid offences, but offence under Section 396 of the IPC. The petitioner is accused No.3. The other accused were available for trial and were tried by the concerned Court in terms of its order dated 27.01.2017. The concerned Court has acquitted all the other accused and split up the case against the persons, who were not available for trial, one of those is the petitioner/accused No.3. The reason so rendered by the concerned Court to acquit the other accused could be gathered from paragraph Nos.17, 18, 19 and

83 to 87 of the order dated27.01.2017, it reads as follows:

"17. P.W.11-Sri.Chandrashekar, the panch witness for the seizure mahazar has deposed that the police have brought four accused near railway lane near RMC Yard .e., near the bush, wherein they have thrown the knife. The accused have picked up the knife M.O.1 from the said bush and the police have obtained his signature on the seizure mahazar Ex.P.15. He has further deposed that the police have seized the knife along with handkerchief M.O.2. He has stated that the police have seized the liquor bottle M.O.3. He identified the signature on the chits containing M.Os.1 to 3. He identifies the signature on M.O.4, but he does not remember when it was seized, as he fails to disclose its contents, hence, the sealed cover is not opened. The said sealed cover is marked as M.O.4, but his signature on M.O.4 is marked as M.O.4(a).

The learned Public Prosecutor has cross examined the P.W.11 and suggested that on 7.02.2011, Yeshwanthpur Railway Police have requested him to act as pancha, as the accused No.2 is going to produce the articles. The accused No.2 has produced the handkerchief M.O.2 and knife M.O.4-knife, but the witness fails to identify M.O.4. But, he identifies his signature on Ex.P.16. This witness has half-heartedly deposed before the court that which of the accused produced the M.Os.1 to 3. But, the Investigating Officer, who has drawn the seizure mahazar Ex.P.15 i.e., recovery of M.Os.1 to 3 at the instance of accused Nos.1 and 4 to 6 have taken the P.W.11 near the huts existed near the Yeshwanthpur Railway Station i.e., Railway KM No.4/900 and produced the M.Os.1 to 3, the said mahazar was drawn on 30.01.2011 between 8-00 a.m., and 10-00 a.m., has not turned up and deposed about the above aspect. The non-examination of