ALTHAF HUSSAIN SAREEF Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the entire proceedings in S.C.No.6/2017 arising out of C.C.No.65/2014 of Mulki Police Station, D.K. District, Mangaluru which is pending on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangaluru.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner who is appearing through video conference and learned HCGP for the respondent - State who is physically present before the Court. Respondent No.2 is served but remained unrepresented.

(3.) Based upon the complaint filed by second respondent/complainant namely Jaya @ Kutti as per Ex.P1 on 11.01.2009, the respondent police registered a case in Crime No.6/2009 against unknown miscreants as per FIR Ex.P.24. It is averred in the complaint that PW.1 - Jaya @ Kutti was resident of Jalligudde house, Moorukaveri village of Mangaluru Taluk and by avocation he was a lorry driver. He was at his residence on 11.1.2009 as it was Sunday. In the night at around 9.15 P.M., PW.6 - Rohit who was a neighbouring resident came to the front-yard of his house and informed that somebody had fallen near Jalligudde of Moorukaveri having met with an accident. It is alleged that said person was one Mohan Ranya who was working as Mason. In the complaint he has stated that he has suspected that while the deceased was walking towards his house from Moorukaveri in the night at around 9.15 p.m. some unknown miscreants had committed the murder with deadly weapons on the vital parts of his body. On the same night on 11.1.2009, on receipt of information, PW.25/PSI visited the spot and received the complaint as per Ex.P1 and registered FIR as per Ex.P24 for the offence punishable under Section 302 r/w 34 of IPC. During the course of investigation accused No.1 was arrested after a lapse of four years based on the statement made one Maduru Yusuf @ Yusuf on 09.12.2010 who was accused in some other crime and voluntary statements came to be recorded. Subsequent to thorough investigation made by the IO, charge sheet came to be laid against the accused persons in C.C.No.37/2014 and petitioner who was arraigned as Accused No.2 was shown as absconding. Accordingly, split up charge sheet was laid against accused No.2 in C.C.No.65/2014.