After Five Co-Accused Were Acquitted, Karnataka HC Quashes Attempted-Dacoity Case Against Sixth Accused Over Similar Allegations

In brief

The question

Whether continuation of proceedings against the petitioner was an abuse of process where the co-accused had been acquitted after trial and the allegations and evidence against them were similar

The court held

The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner, accused No. 6, in C.C. No. 416/2006, arising from Crime No. 100/2005, for offences under Sections 395 and 511 of the IPC, pending before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Mulbagal

01Facts

The complainant reported that six unknown persons stopped his lorry, assaulted him and its cleaner, and took the lorry carrying cigarette boxes; the police registered a case under Sections 395 and 511 of the IPC

¶ 2

After arresting accused Nos. 1–5, the police implicated the petitioner, accused No. 6, on the basis of their voluntary statements.

¶ 3, 7

The petitioner’s case was split up because he was absconding, while the trial of accused Nos. 1–5 proceeded

¶ 3, 7

The Sessions Court acquitted those accused after finding that the evidence of PWs. 1–6 did not prima facie establish the offences

¶ 4 · ¶ 9

The petitioner sought to quash the pending proceedings against him under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

¶ 1

02Issues

i.Whether continuation of proceedings against the petitioner was an abuse of process where the co-accused had been acquitted after trial and the allegations and evidence against them were similar

¶ 6, 9–10

ii.Whether the petitioner’s abscondence and the State’s submission that he was required for further investigation justified continuation of those proceedings

¶ 7 · ¶ 9

03Law Applied

The Court considered its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of the process of the court

¶ 1

The alleged offences were under Sections 395 and 511 of the IPC

¶ 1–2

Relying on Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi v. State of Gujarat, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 782, the Court applied the principle that continuing proceedings against a co-accused who stands on a similar footing to accused persons already acquitted may amount to an abuse of process

¶ 9

Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 482

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 395 Section 511

04Reasoning

The complaint and FIR named six unknown persons, and the petitioner was implicated only through the voluntary statements of accused Nos. 1–5

¶ 5–6, 9

The charge-sheet materials disclosed no specific overt act by the petitioner, while the allegations against him were similar to those against the acquitted co-accused

¶ 9

The Court concluded that, given the acquittal after trial and the insufficiency of the evidence to establish the offences against accused Nos. 1–5, requiring the petitioner to face a separate proceeding on materially similar allegations would amount to an abuse of process.

¶ 9–10

Although the petitioner had absconded, the Court did not consider that fact sufficient to alter its conclusion

¶ 7, 9–10