Proceedings against an accused may be quashed on parity when co-accused’s proceedings were quashed.

The petitioner, accused No. 1, sought to quash proceedings in C.C. No. 2095/2022, arising from PCR No. 243/2022, for alleged offences under Sections 23, 23(1), 23(2), 20(1), 20(2) and 20(3) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (“PCPNDT Act”)

The petitioner relied on earlier orders quashing the same proceedings against accused Nos. 3 and 4. The Court noted that those proceedings had been quashed and considered whether the petitioner was entitled to similar relief on the basis of parity.

1. Whether the proceedings against the petitioner, accused No. 1, should be quashed on the ground of parity with accused Nos. 3 and 4, whose proceedings in the same case had already been quashed.

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

The alleged offences were under Sections 23, 23(1), 23(2), 20(1), 20(2) and 20(3) of the PCPNDT Act.

The Court applied the doctrine of parity, relying on its prior orders quashing proceedings against accused Nos. 3 and 4 in the same case.

The Court treated the prior quashing orders concerning accused Nos. 3 and 4 as determinative of the petitioner’s claim to parity.

It noted that the proceedings against those co-accused in C.C. No. 2095/2022 had been quashed and concluded that the petitioner should receive the same relief.

The Court did not set out a separate, detailed assessment of the allegations or evidence against the petitioner.