HARI @ HARIPRASAD V vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024





IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K


CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1148 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

HARI @ HARIPRASAD V
S/O VENKATESHBABU S
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT NO.21, TIPPUNAGAR
CHINTHAMANI TOWN
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT-562 101
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. THYAGARAJ M, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPTD BY SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
MULBAGAL TOWN POLICE STATION
MULBAGAL SUB-DIVISION,
MULBAGAL TALUK
KOLAR DISTRICT-563 131
REPRESENTED BY HCGP
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560 001

2. SRI. N. UDAYKUMAR
S/O SUBRAMANI SHETTY
NEAR RAJARAJESHWARI TEMPLE
K.R. PURAM, BANGALORE-560 036
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAVEED S, HCGP FOR R1,
VIDE ORDER DATED 04.09.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS
DEFERRED)










Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024



THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.416/2006 REGISTERED
U/S.395,511 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC MULBAGAL, KOLAR DISTRICT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash
the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.6 in
C.C.No.416/2006, arising out of Crime No.100/2005, registered
by Mulgabal Police, for the offences punishable under Sections
395 and 511 of IPC, pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge and
JMFC, Mulbagal, Kolar District.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are, respondent No.2
lodged a complaint before respondent No.1-Police on
17.04.2005 against six unknown persons alleging that on
16.04.2005 at about 11:30 p.m., he was transporting a load of
ITC cigarette box in a lorry bearing No.KA-01/A-4401 from
Yelahanka to Tirupati. When he was passing NH-4 bypass near
Mulbagal, six unknown persons came there in a Tata Sumo
vehicle and signalled to stop the lorry of respondent No.2 to

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024



over take it. When respondent No.2 stopped his lorry, the said
six unknown persons dragged respondent No.2 and the cleaner
out of the said lorry, assaulted them and made to sit in a Tata
Sumo vehicle and robbed the lorry along with ITC cigarette
boxes. According to respondent No.2, the value of ITC cigarette
boxes was Rs.97,00,000/-. Thereafter, the said unknown
persons left the lorry near Narayana Kere near Malur. The same
was telephonically intimated to respondent No.2 through some
unknown person. Thereafter, respondent No.2 secured the lorry
with ITC cigarette boxes and lodged the complaint before
respondent No.1-Police.

3. On the strength of the said complaint, the said
Police registered a case in Crime No.100/2005 against six
unknown persons. After investigation, the said Police arrested
accused Nos.1 to 5. Based on their voluntary statement,
implicated the petitioner as accused No.6 and laid charge sheet
against them. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate took
cognizance of the offences and case was committed to the
Sessions Court in S.C.No.284/2006. The case against the
petitioner was split up in C.C.No.416/2006, since the petitioner

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024



was absconding. However, the trial was proceeded against
accused Nos.1 to 5 in S.C.No.284/2006 and the prosecution
examined in total six witnesses and marked several documents.

4. Upon assessment of oral and documentary
evidence, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted accused Nos.1
to 5 vide judgment dated 17.12.2007. As such, aggrieved by
the pendency of the proceedings against the petitioner in split
up C.C.No.416/2006, the petitioner/accused No.6 is before this
Court to quash the proceedings.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned HCGP for respondent No.1.

6. The primary contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner is that, in view of the acquittal of accused Nos.1 to 5,
who stands in a similar footing of this petitioner, continuation of
criminal proceedings against this petitioner is nothing but abuse
of process of Court. By placing reliance on the complaint,
charge sheet averments, statement of witnesses and the
evidence of PWs.1 to 6, it is clear that the allegation against
accused Nos.1 to 6 are similar in nature. Admittedly, the

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024



complaint is lodged by respondent No.2 against six unknown
persons and FIR was also registered against six unknown
persons. This petitioner was implicated in the crime only based
on the voluntary statement of accused Nos.1 to 5. In such
circumstances, continuation of proceedings against the
petitioner/accused No.6 amount to abuse of process of Court.
Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

7. The prayer of the petitioner is opposed by the
learned HCGP. He submits that, from the date of filing of FIR,
the petitioner was absconding and later, he approached the
Sessions Court for grant of Anticipatory Bail. The learned
Sessions Judge directed him to surrender before the Trial
Court, despite he failed to surrender. As such, he submits that
the petitioner is required for further investigation. Accordingly,
he prays to dismiss the petition.

8. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties
and perused the documents made available before this Court.

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024



9. Admittedly, the complaint was lodged against six
unknown persons by respondent No.2 and the FIR was also
came to be registered against six unknown persons.
Subsequently, respondent No.1-Police arrested accused Nos.1
to 5. Based on their voluntary statement, implicated the
petitioner as accused No.6 and laid charge sheet against them.
On perusal of the charge sheet averments and statement of all
the material witnesses reveal that the dacoit was committed by
six unknown persons and there is no such specific overt act
attributed against each accused. The learned Sessions Judge
acquitted accused Nos.1 to 5 for the reason that the evidence
of PWs.1 to 6 prima facie not revealed the commission of
offences by accused Nos.1 to 5. No doubt, this petitioner is
absconding from the date of registration of FIR. However, the
fact remains that the allegations against accused Nos.1 to 5
and this petitioner are similar in nature. Once the accused are
acquitted, the continuation of further proceedings against the
co-accused, who stands in a similar footing of the accused who
are acquitted, is nothing but abuse of process of Court, as

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58037
CRL.P No. 1148 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010064502024



held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Javed Shaukat
Ali Qureshi vs. State of Gujarat - 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 782 .

10. In the instance case, since this petitioner/accused
No.6 stands in similar footing of accused Nos.1 to 5, who have
been acquitted by the Trial Court after a detailed trial,
continuation of proceedings and once again leading evidence
against him amounts to abuse of process of Court. Accordingly,
I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

i. The petition is allowed .

ii. The proceedings against the
petitioner/accused No.6 in C.C.No.416/2006, arising
out of Crime No.100/2005 registered by Mulgabal
Police, for the offences punishable under Sections
395 and 511 of IPC, pending on the file of Prl. Civil
Judge and JMFC, Mulbagal, Kolar District , is hereby
quashed.

SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE




HKV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43