Telangana High Court
Mir Qayam Ali Abedi vs The State Of Telangana on 12 March, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.11726 OF 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short the Cr.P.C) to quash the
proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.1189 of
2019 on the file of the learned VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 380 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (for short 'the
IPC').
2. Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2/de facto
complainant lodged a complaint before the Police stating that in
the month of April, 2011 with a view to keep his electronic goods
articles in a rental house, he made an agreement with one Mir
Mustafa Ali for monthly rent of Rs.3,500/-. Later, Mir Mustafa
provided one hall on the upstairs of his house, and the same is
using as Godown. As an electronic trader he used to purchase the
electronic items and keep that it in the Godown. On 18.03.2012,
he kept the electronic items in the godown and locked. On
13.06.2012, when the de facto complainant along with his
managers Mohammed Imran and Mohammed Arshed went to
godown, found that the godown doors were already opened. Later,
it is alleged that the above said items were stolen by Mir Mustafa
SKS,J
Crl.P.No.11726 OF 2023
Ali, his sons Mir Hussain Ali and Mir Qayam Ali and the same have
been sold to his relatives and friends. Basing on the said
complaint, the Police registered a case in Crime No.182 of 2012
and after completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet and
the same was numbered as C.C.No.295 of 2013, on the file of the
learned VIII Additional Chief Metroplitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.
After completion of full-fledged trial, accused No.1 was acquitted.
Due to health issues, the petitioner/accused No.2, could not able
to appear before the trial Court. Hence, the trial Court has issued
N.B.W against him. Thereafter, the case was split up against the
petitioner and renumbered as C.C.No.1189 of 2019, on the file of
the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally,
Hyderabad. Hence, the present Criminal Petition.
3. Heard Sri Mohammed Zaki, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant
Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1-State.
Though notice was served upon respondent No.2, none appeared
on his behalf.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is
no evidence against accused No.1 who is the main accused and
after full-fledged trial, he was acquitted. He further submitted that
even if the trial is conducted, no purpose would be served, as such,
SKS,J
Crl.P.No.11726 OF 2023
prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the
petitioner/accused No.2.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
submitted that though the case was ended in acquittal against
accused No.1, the petitioner/accused No.2 has to appear before the
trial Court and face the trial and therefore, the same will be
decided by the trial Court.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by both the learned
counsel and having gone through the material available on record,
it appears that the trial Court has examined P.W.1, who even in his
evidence did not mention about the accused committing the offence
and since the allegation against the accused has not found to be
established, has acquitted the main accused in C.C.No.295 of
2013. Though there are catena of judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court and various High Courts, this Court has relies
upon the judgments in Pothula Suresh vs. The State of Andhra
Pradesh 1 and Mohinder Singh vs. State of Punjab 2, wherein it is
observed that when some of the accused in the same case found
not guilty and are acquitted after full-fledged trial, the proceedings
against the other accused are liable to be quashed.
2011 Crl.L.J. 609
(2018) 11 SCC 570
SKS,J
Crl.P.No.11726 OF 2023
7. In the present case also, accused No.1 was acquitted after
full-fledged trial in C.C.No.295 of 2013. Therefore, the proceedings
in C.C.No.1189 of 2019 against the petitioner/accused No.2 are
also liable to be quashed.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the
proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.1189 of
2019 on the file of the learned VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Hyderabad are hereby quashed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
_____________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 12 .03.2024
SAI
