Facts
The second respondent complained that, on 24 April 2019, several persons associated with finance companies intercepted the autorickshaw in which she and others were travelling near Kanaikanahalli, abused and assaulted them, and pulled their hair and removed a veil
Source reference: pp.3–5The police investigated Crime No. 245/2019 and filed a charge sheet naming the petitioner as accused No. 3.
Source reference: pp.4, 6He sought to quash the proceedings, arguing that he was not named in the FIR and that no material connected him to the incident.
Source reference: pp.4, 6The State opposed the petition, submitting that witness statements supported the charge sheet.
Source reference: pp.4–5Issues
1. Whether the proceedings against the petitioner could be quashed where he was not named in the FIR and the record contained no other material connecting him to the incident.
Source reference: pp.6–72. Whether continuing the prosecution against the petitioner, in those circumstances, would be a futile exercise and an abuse of process.
Source reference: p.6Law Applied
The petition invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Source reference: p.2The alleged offences included Sections 143, 504, 323, 341, 506 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, although the judgment also describes the charge-sheet offences as including Section 354.
Source reference: pp.2–3The Court applied the principle that proceedings may be quashed where the material on record does not connect the accused to the alleged incident and continuation of the case would amount to an abuse of process.
Source reference: pp.6–7The judgment cites no precedent.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The Court considered the complaint and witness statements and noted that, although several people were allegedly involved in the incident, the petitioner was not named in the FIR and the record disclosed no other connecting material showing that he participated in it.
Source reference: pp.5–6It also noted that he was an employee of L&T Finance.
Source reference: p.6On that record, the Court concluded that proceeding against him would be futile and an abuse of process.
Source reference: p.6Holding
The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings in Crime No. 245/2019 insofar as they concerned the petitioner.
It clarified that this relief would not affect prosecution of the remaining accused in accordance with law.
Source reference: p.7Acts & Sections Cited
8 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731
Indian Penal Code, 18607
Original Court PDF
CHANDRASHEKARA T PvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
