- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33714 CRL.P No. 12218 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12218 OF 2025 BETWEEN: RAJA S/O NANJAIAH@ BILIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KODAVATHI VILLAGE, HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.N. RADHA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAJAGOPALANAGAR POLICE, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. NAGARAJA B K S/O KEMPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O HANUMANTHANAGAR, BYRANAYAKANAHALLI, KODAVATHI POST, HULIYURUDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED:22.08.2025 NOTICE TO R2 IS DEFERRED) Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33714 CRL.P No. 12218 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.186/2025, ON THE FILE OF THE LRD. LV ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE(CCH-56) BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PU/S 302, 120B, R/W 34 OF IPC AND U/S 25(1)(B)(b), 4 OF ARMS ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.4 is seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in SC.No.186/2025 for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120B read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 25(1B)(b) and Section 4 of the Arms Act. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, drawing the attention of this Court to the judgment rendered by the learned Sessions Judge in S.C.No.271/2022, has pointed out that the other co-accused, who were tried for identical allegations and on the very same set of evidence, have been acquitted by a judgment and order of acquittal dated 28.03.2025. It is submitted that the substratum of the prosecution case having failed in the earlier trial, there - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33714 CRL.P No. 12218 of 2025 remains no independent material to continue proceedings against the present petitioner. Placing reliance on the said judgment of acquittal and further relying upon the view taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in cases of similar nature, it is urged that the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of process of law. 3. In order to substantiate the contention that this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can take judicial notice of the acquittal of co-accused in a connected case and quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner, reliance has been placed on two recent pronouncements of the Co-ordinate Bench in Crl.P.No.12505/2023, W.P.No.6359/2025 and Crl.P.No.4703/2025. In the said cases, the Co-ordinate Bench has categorically held that once the co-accused, who were alleged to have played a principal role in the commission of the offence, stand acquitted after a full-fledged trial, the continuance of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33714 CRL.P No. 12218 of 2025 criminal proceedings against another accused on the same allegations would be wholly unjustified and would only result in multiplicity of proceedings without serving the ends of justice. 4. In the present case, it is not in dispute that accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 to 8, who were similarly placed as the present petitioner and against whom identical allegations were levied, have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 120B read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 25(1B)(b) and Section 4 of the Arms Act. 5. The Co-ordinate Bench in a reported judgment in the case of Mohammed Ilias vs .State of Karnataka1 in a similar set of facts has also categorically held that in cases where evidence adduced in the case against all the accused persons is inseparable and indivisible and that being so one accused cannot be treated differently on the 1 2001 SCC OnLineKar 260 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33714 CRL.P No. 12218 of 2025 basis of the said evidence. Once the trial Court, upon appreciation of the entire evidence led by the prosecution, has arrived at a categorical finding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the principal accused, there would be no purpose in subjecting the petitioner to an independent trial based on the very same set of allegations and evidence. 6. This Court is also mindful of the principle laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench that in such circumstances, the High Court, in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., is not powerless to interdict further proceedings. Such intervention is warranted not only to prevent abuse of the process of the Court but also to secure the ends of justice. Having regard to the fact that the co-accused, who were standing trial for the very same offences, have been acquitted and set at liberty, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would be an exercise in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33714 CRL.P No. 12218 of 2025 futility. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the relief sought for. 7. For the reasons stated supra, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The proceedings pending in S.C.No.186/2025 on the file of the learned LV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-56), as against the petitioner are hereby quashed. (iii) The Jail Superintendent, Central Prison, Bengaluru, is directed to release the petitioner forthwith, if he is not required to be detained in any other case. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56