- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO.13886 OF 2025 BETWEEN: SAMEER @ SAMEER KHAN, S/O. SAMEULLA KHAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO. 42, 'M' CROSS, MADARASAB LAYOUT, GURAPPANA PLAYA, BTM LAYOUT, 1ST PHASE, BENGALURU- 560 029. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRAPPA K. N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, WILSON GARDEN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 2. VAJRESH S/O. JAYARAJU, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.165, 1ST MAIN, 4TH, CROSS, VINAYAKANAGARA, ADUGODI POST, WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE- 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESH, ADDL. SPP) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S. 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN MATTER BEARING S.C.NO.847/2025 OF WILSON GARDEN P.S. PENDING IN THE FILE OF THE HONBLE LXVII ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU CITY AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN WHEREIN THE PETITIONER HEREIN IS ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.1 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 143,144,146,147,148,324,307,436 R/W 149 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has preferred this petition seeking to quash the entire proceedings pending against him in S.C. No.847/2025 on the file of the 67th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City. 2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, Additional SPP for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The present petition for quashing is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 on the ground that the trial Court has acquitted similarly placed accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 in S.C. No.688/2022. 4. FIR is registered against 8 to 10 unknown persons, on a complaint lodged by the injured by name Sri.Vajresha, in Crime No.91/2016 of Wilson Garden Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149, 324, 307 and 436 of IPC. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 5. Charge sheet was filed against accused Nos.1 to 13. As the petitioner and some of the other accused remained absent before the trial Court, the case against them came to be split up. The trial proceeded against accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 in S.C. No.688/2022. The split-up case against the petitioner was numbered as S.C. No.847/2025. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has furnished a copy of the judgment passed in S.C. No.688/2022, wherein the Court of 67th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City has acquitted accused Nos. 4, 6 and 7, vide judgment dated 01.09.2025. The copies of the deposition of the material witnesses namely PWs.1 to 4 are also furnished. 7. In this case, PW4 is the first informant/injured and PWs.1 to 3 are the eye witnesses. All the four witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. The learned Sessions Judge while - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 appreciating their evidence has noticed that the accused were wearing masks at the time of incident. The witnesses have stated that they have not given any statement before the police and not identified the accused persons. 8. It is relevant to cull out paragraphs Nos.16 and 17 of the Judgment dated 1.09.2025. "16. On considering. the. oral and documentary evidence placed before the court, it is pertinent to note that the victim and the alleged eye witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. Also they have not entitled the accused persons. Even otherwise there is contradiction regarding the weapons which were said to have been in possession of the attackers who assaulted C.W.1. 17. Further it is the case of the prosecution that, as per the voluntary statement of the accused persons, the weapons (M.Os.2 to 5) were seized, but to corroborate the same, the pancha witnesses have not been examined before the court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 Even otherwise, as discussed supra there is contradiction regarding the weapons alleged to have been used by the accused to assault C.W.1 and those seized at the instance of the accused. Also the identity of the accused is not proved before the court. In view of the cogent, contradicting and inconsistent evidence, it can be safely that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused Nos.4, 6 and 7 have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 324, 307 and 436 r/w. Section 149 of IPC. Hence, I answer the Points No.1 to 6 in the Negative." 9. The evidence collected by the prosecution against all the accused is same. The prosecution intends to rely on the same material even against the petitioner, which it has relied against accused Nos.4, 6 and 7. Hence, no purpose will be served in proceeding against the petitioner, as similarly placed accused are acquitted by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41244 CRL.P No. 13886 of 2025 trial Court, for lack of evidence and hostility of the material witnesses. 10. Hence, the following ORDER Petition is allowed. The entire proceedings pending against the petitioner/accused No.1 in S.C. No.847/2025 on the file of the Court of 67th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City are quashed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE AP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28