Karnataka High Court
Abdul Aaris vs The State on 18 January, 2021
Author: H.P.Sandesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4271 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
Mr. Abdul Aaris
S/o Ibrahim
Aged about 35 years
Electric Worker
R/o Bannuru House
Bannuru Village and Post
Empekkallu, Renja
Puttur Taluk, D.K.District-574203. ...
Petitioner
(By Sri. P.P.Hegde, Advocate)
AND:
1. The State
Sub-Inspector of Police
Jayapura Police Station
Chikkamangaluru District
Represented by the
State Public Prosecutor
High Court of Karnataka at
Bengaluru-560001.
2. Sri. J.C. Vijaya Raghav
Age 53 years
S/o late G.K. Chandrashekar
R/at Guddethoota Village
Koppa Taluk
Chikkamagaluru District
Pin Code-577123
Occupation: Agriculturist ... Respondents
(By Sri K S Abhijith, HCGP for R1)
-----
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. praying to quash the criminal case pending in
C.C.No.145/2020 (arising out of Cr.No.8/2020 of Jayapura
Police Station) on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and
JMFC, Koppa, Chikkamagalur District for the offence
punishable under Sections 395, 450, 506 of IPC in so far as
petitioner herein/accused No.15 is concerned.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this
day, the court made the following through video
conference:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State.
2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., praying this Court to quash the criminal case
pending in C.C.No.145/2020 (arising out of Crime
No.8/2020 of Jayapura Police Station), on the file of
Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Koppa,
Chikkamagaluru District for the offences punishable
under Sections 395, 450, 506 of IPC.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that on
06.03.2020 at about 10.30 p.m., when the
complainant and his wife were in their house, a group
of 15-20 persons trespassed into their house by
holding swords, clubs and thereby committed dacoity
by stealing Rs.9,49,000/- worth of gold and silver
ornaments and a cash of Rs.2,50,000/-. It is also
alleged that they also tied hands of the complainant
with gum tape and when the wife of the complainant
ran into the bedroom to save herself, one among the
gang pulled her out from the room and forcefully held
her shoulder and rest of the persons have searched
every room. This petitioner has arrayed as accused
No.11 in the remand report and as accused No.15 in
the chargesheet. The allegations against this
petitioner is that he was watching outside along with
other accused Nos.14 to 17. This petitioner is arrayed
as accused based on the statement of co-accused and
also the statement of this petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would
submit that the case was registered against the
unknown persons. This petitioner has been arrested
from his residence and he has been falsely implicated
in this case. There is no material before this Court that
this petitioner has involved in the said case. The
learned counsel also submits that this petitioner has
been arrayed as accused No.15 on only the say of co-
accused and the same is hit by under Section 25 of the
Evidence Act. The learned counsel would also submits
that no test identification parade was conducted and
there is no any legally admissible material against the
petitioner/accused to connect him with the alleged
offence. The continuance of the proceedings against
this petitioner amounts to abuse of process. Hence, he
prays to allow the petition.
5. The counsel appearing for the State would
submit that this petitioner is arrayed as accused on the
statement of co-accused and the petitioner.
6. Having heard the submissions made by both
the learned counsel and perused the records. At the
first instance, the case was registered against the
unknown persons. This petitioner was arrested in his
residence and while filing the chargesheet, he was
arrayed as accused No.15. Though in the complaint it
is stated that gold and silver ornaments worth of
Rs.9,49,000/- and a cash of Rs.2,50,000/- was the
subject matter of dacoity, but nothing has been
recovered at the instance of the petitioner except the
statement of the co-accused and also the voluntary
statement of this petitioner. The voluntary statement
is hit by Section 25 of the Evidence Act and also the
statement of the co-accused. The prosecution also
failed to place any material on record or to show that
he was at the sport at the time of committing dacoity.
The call details are also not placed to substantiate the
case of prosecution. The contention of the petitioner's
counsel that no test identification is conducted cannot
be accepted for the reason that he was not at the spot
but watching outside. When such being the case, in
the absence of any substantive material to proceed
against this petitioner, the Apex Court in the judgment
delivered on 31st July 2018 in Surinder Kumar Khanna
vs. Intelligence Officer in para 14 held that in absence
of any conviction based on voluntary statement and
co-accused statement. In view of the principles laid
down in the judgment and also having perused the
material available on record connect the
petitioner/accused No.15, there is no any recovery and
he has been arrayed as accused No.15 only on the
basis of the voluntary statement so which has been hit
by Section 25 of the Evidence Act. If, the criminal
proceedings is continued against the petitioner/accused
in the absence of substantive material which leads to
miscarriage of justice and also it amounts to abuse of
process.
7. In view of the discussion made above, I pass
the following order:
ORDER
The petition is allowed. The
proceedings in C.C.No.145/2020 (arising
out of Crime No.8/2020 of Jayapura Police
Station), on the file of Additional Civil
Judge and JMFC Court, Koppa,
Chikkamagaluru District for the offences
punishable under Sections 395, 450, 506
of IPC against the petitioner/accused
No.15 is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GJM
