STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. CHERIMONU @ MOHAMMED ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has made all possible efforts to trace the Respondent -accused. The obvious difficulty that has arisen is that in this case like in all other similar cases on the trial Court passing an order of acquittal, the accused who was in custody had to be released forthwith. Even if the accused are on bail and steps have been taken to secure their presence through a bail bond and sureties etc., all that comes to an end on the order of acquittal being passed and the Government and prosecuting authorities have absolutely no hold over the accused. Experience has shown that in a large number of cases, the acquittal orders are extremely vulnerable and the Government is well within its rights to file an appeal. That procedure however even if expedited to the maximum would take a little time because the copy of the judgment has to be procured as it is not immediately available and thereafter, it has to be considered and steps taken to move the higher Court. In the meanwhile, the accused invariably take necessary steps to ensure that they cannot be traced.

(2.) TO quote an example as far as the present case is concerned, the accused was working as a coolie. He had no fixed place of residence or any property in the village. He had no relations or family members and once he was released, he has gone away from that place and despite efforts the Police report shows that they have not been able to trace his whereabouts and track him down.

(3.) THE learned Additional State Public Prosecutor shall forward a copy of this order to the Law Secretary both at the State level and the Central Government for purposes of implementing the Court suggestions at the very earliest.