AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H.N. Nagamohan Das, J.—Petitioner is accused No. 2 in Cr. No. 43/2004 for the offences punishable u/s 372 IPC read with Section 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. After investigation the respondent police filed charge sheet against the petitioner as accused No. 1 and another person as accused No. 2 in S.C. 30/2009. Since the petitioner remained absent and absconded, the Sessions Judge split the case and proceeded against accused No. 2 and the same ended in acquittal vide judgment dated 2.4.2011. On tracing the petitioner, he was arrested and a split charge sheet was filed in S.C. No. 192/2013. The prosecution is relying on same set of evidence which they have relied in the case of accused No. 2. Since the Sessions Judge by appreciating the evidence relied on by the prosecution acquitted accused No. 2, the petitioner/accused No. 1 is seeking extension of the benefit in S.C. No. 30/2009. In identical circumstances the Supreme Court in Deepak Rajak Vs. State of West Bengal, held as under:
A departure may be made in cases where the accused had not surrendered after the conviction in addition to not filing an appeal against the conviction. But as in the present case, after surrender, the benefit of acquittal in the case of co-accused on similar accusations can be extended.
Since the prosecution is relying on same set of evidence, I am of the considered opinion that petitioner is entitled for extension of benefit of acquittal. Accordingly, the petition is hereby allowed. The proceedings in S.C. No. 192/2013 on the file of IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Mysore are hereby quashed. Ordered accordingly.