Karnataka HC Quashes Proceedings Against Accused In Alleged ₹54.32-Lakh Fake Court FD Case, Citing Parity

The prosecution arose from an attempt to encash a fixed-deposit receipt for ₹54,32,000, purportedly deposited in the name of the Principal Civil Judge and CJM, Ballari, in O.S. No. 95 of 2011.

After bank officials questioned the receipt’s authenticity, police registered a case against Accused Nos. 1 and 2; the petitioner, Accused No. 4, and others were implicated based on statements made by those accused, and a charge sheet followed.

The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings under Sections 482 CrPC/528 BNSS, relying on parity with Accused Nos. 3 and 5, whose proceedings had previously been quashed by the High Court.

The petitioner invoked the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, corresponding to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to seek quashing of criminal proceedings.

The offences alleged were under Sections 403, 406, 409, 420, 465, 466, 468, 471, 474, 381, 120-B and 511 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court applied the principle of parity, concluding that an accused similarly situated to co-accused whose proceedings had been quashed should receive the same benefit where the allegations and basis of implication were materially alike.

No specific precedent was cited in the order.

The Court found that Accused Nos. 3 to 5 stood on the same footing and had been implicated on the basis of the statements of Accused Nos. 1 and 2.

Since the proceedings against Accused Nos. 3 and 5 had already been quashed and the petitioner faced similar allegations, the Court held that parity justified quashing the proceedings against him.

The Court did not separately determine the admissibility or sufficiency of the co-accused statements.