AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sreenivas Harish Kumar, J
Heard the petitioner's counsel and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State.
This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner is accused No.12 in S.C.No.920/2020 on the file of the LXIV Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. He is facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 402, 120(B) of IPC and Sections 25, 26, 27(2) and 3 of
Arms Act.
It is the argument of the petitioner's counsel that split up charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and trial against accused No.1 and 10 ended in
their acquittal. Since those two accused have been acquitted, the case against the petitioner is required to be quashed.
Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that because of the continuous absence of the petitioner before the trial Court, a split up charge
sheet had to be filed and for securing presence of the petitioner, proclamation was to be issued. There are no grounds for quashing the proceedings
against the petitioner.
The petitioner cannot seek quashing of the proceedings against him just because the other accused have been acquitted. Based on the evidence the
trial Court has to take a decision whether to acquit or convict the petitioner. Acquittal of other two accused cannot be a ground to quash the
proceedings. There are no merits in the petition. Therefore petition is dismissed.
IA No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration.