- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.19481 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: MR SUNIL KUMAR G @ SUNIL S/O GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/A NO.32, NAKSHATHRA NILAYA 1ST CROSS, 1ST STAGE, CHIKKANANJUNDAPPA LAYOUT KALKERE, HORAMAVU POST, BANGALORE – 560 043 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE JNANABHARATHI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001 2. GIRISHA S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/A 49/50, SHANTHI NIVASA 3RD CROSS, SOLLAPURASAMMA EXTENSION BANGALORE – 560 042 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 07.07.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023 PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.1 / STATION HOUSE OFFICER TO RELEASE BLACK COLOUR BMW CAR BEARING NO.KA 51 MF 5666 SEIZED ON 25-05-2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-E PURSUANT TO REGISTRATION OF FIR IN CRIME NO.65/2018 OF JNANABHARATHI POLICE STATION VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or orders directing Respondent No.1/Station House Officer to release Black Colour BMW car bearing No.KA51 MF 5666 seized on 25.05.2018 vide Annexure-E pursuant to registration of FIR in Crime No.65/2018 of Jnanabharathi Police Station vide Annexure-A in favour of the petitioner. (ii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstance of the case in interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 For the order proposed, notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2 filed a complaint, which was registered as FIR in Crime No.65/2018 against the petitioner – accused No.1 and four others for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 363, 342, 323, 307, 397, 506(B) r/w 149 of IPC and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1959. In pursuance of the same, respondent No.1 conducted investigation and proceedings in S.C.No.1760/2018 were instituted against the petitioner and other accused persons. The said proceedings in relation to accused Nos.2 to 5 culminated in judgment of acquittal in S.C.No.1760/2018 dated 18.09.2024. Insofar as petitioner – accused No.1 is concerned, this Court quashed the proceedings vide order dated 15.04.2025 passed in Crl.P.No.1843/2025 as hereunder: “Sri D. Likith, learned counsel files vakalath on behalf of respondent No.2 and the same is placed on record. 2. The petitioner herein who is facing investigation for the offences punishable under 143, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 144, 147, 148, 363, 342, 323, 307, 397, 506(b) r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of Indian Arms Act, 1959 is before this Court seeking relief. 3. The prosecution alleges that, the complainant came in contact with petitioner's wife who frequently visited the bar and restaurant along with one Thoushith, in which the complainant was working as a supplier. On 25.02.2018, wife of the petitioner visited the bar and restaurant along with Thoushith and both of them left without paying the bill. The complainant called Thoushith on his mobile phone and Thoushith informed him not to disclose that petitioner's wife had come with Thoushith for lunch. On 28.2.2018, when the complainant came in a motor cycle to collect Rs.500/- which was due from Thoushith, at that time, 7 to 8 people came in two cars and forcibly abducted the complainant and confined him in a farm house and the said 7 to 8 persons abused the complainant and physically assaulted by saying that whether he is having an affair with the wife of petitioner. Thereafter the forced the complainant to call Thoushith and asked him to pay the bill and one Tsunami Kitti kept a knife on his thigh and threatened to stab him if he did not arrange a meeting with Thoushith and one of the person who was with Tsunami Kitti had pointed a small gun at the complainant. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 4. The charge sheet was split since the petitioner had absconded, and in the split charge sheet, the trial against the other accused, was conducted by the Trial Court. The Trial Court acquitted accused Nos.2 to 5 after holding that the prosecution had failed to establish their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as the material witnesses had turned hostile. 5. The petitioner has filed this petition to quash the impugned proceedings, contending that the allegations against him are identical to those made against other accused Nos.2 to 5, and that the same set of witnesses is to be examined in both cases. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondent-State. 7. A perusal of the FIR reveals that the allegations against the petitioner are not distinct or separate from those made against Accused Nos. 2 to 5. 8. It is a settled principle of law that when no distinct or separate allegations are made against an accused, and when co-accused facing identical allegations have been acquitted, continuing prosecution against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 9. In Crl.P. No. 6857/2020, a coordinate Bench of this Court held that a co-accused’s acquittal is not admissible as evidence under Sections 40 to 44 of the Evidence Act, and thus, the benefit of acquittal cannot automatically be extended to the remaining accused. However, in that case, the acquittal was based on only two witnesses (PWs 1 and 2) turning hostile, while other key witnesses had not been examined. 10. In the present case, however, the prosecution has examined all the charge sheet witnesses and produced the relevant documents, yet failed to establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in the acquittal of the co-accused. 11. Given that all prosecution witnesses have been examined and the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt, subjecting the petitioner to investigation would be a futile exercise, as the probability of Police filing the charge sheet is remote and bleak. To prevent abuse of the process of law and maintain parity, it is appropriate to quash the impugned FIR. 12. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 ii) The Impugned FIR in Crime No.65/2018 registered by the Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bengaluru, stands quashed and the petitioner-accused herein is acquitted of the offences alleged against him.” 4. The aforesaid facts and circumstances and the material on record clearly indicates that proceedings initiated against the petitioner – accused No.1 culminated in quashment by this Court in Crl.P.No.1843/2025 dated 15.04.2025 and the remaining accused have been acquitted in S.C.No.1760/2018 dated 18.09.2024. 5. Under these circumstances, the question of permitting respondent No.1 to retain the said car i.e., Black Colour BMW Car bearing registration No.KA-51-MF-5666 would not arise and the said car is directed to be released in favour of the petitioner. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Respondent No.1 is directed to release Black Colour BMW Car bearing registration No.KA-51-MF-5666 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24583 WP No. 19481 of 2025 seized on 25.05.2018 vide Annexure – E pursuant to registration of FIR in Crime No.65/2018 of Jnanabharathi Police Station vide Annexure – A in favour of the petitioner immediately upon receipt of copy of this order, without any delay, forthwith. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 39