MOHAMMED ILLIAS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR TO TAKE NOTICE. THE MATTER WAS TAKEN UP FOR FINAL HEARING. IN THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS, THE CONTINUATION OF TRIAL AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CC NO. 1104 OF 1998 IS CHALLENGED ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, FIRST CLASS, GULBARGA.

(2.) THE PETITIONER IS THE ACCUSED IN THE CASE AND HE IS SHOWN TO BE absconding. THEREFORE, THE CASE AGAINST THE PETITIONER WAS SPLIT UP AND charge-SHEET WAS LAID AGAINST THE OTHER AVAILABLE ACCUSED 1 TO 3 WHO faced TRIAL IN SC NO. 24 OF 1999 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SESSIONS judge, GULBARGA FOR COMMITTING AN OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498-A AND 307 OF THE IPC READ WITH SECTION 34 OF THE IPC. AFTER THE trial, THE SESSIONS JUDGE ACQUITTED THE ACCUSED 1 TO 3. THE JUDGMENT OF the SESSIONS JUDGE PRODUCED DISCLOSES THAT ALL THE MATERIAL WITNESSES turned HOSTILE AND DID NOT SUPPORT THE PROSECUTION CASE. THE PETITIONER was ARRESTED AND PROCEEDINGS WERE REVIVED AGAINST HIM IN THE SPLIT charge-SHEET. IN VIEW OF THE ACQUITTAL OF THE ACCUSED 1 TO 3, THE PETITIONER contends THAT THE TRIAL WHATEVER PROPOSED TO BE HELD AGAINST HIM, IN THE ultimate ANALYSIS, CANNOT HAVE ANY DIFFERENT RESULT OTHER THAN THE ACQUITTAL HANDED OUT TO ACCUSED 1 TO 3. THEREFORE HE HAS PRAYED FOR QUASHING OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 1104 OF 1998.

(3.) IN THIS REGARD, THE COUNSEL RELIED UPON THE RULING OF THE DELHI HIGH court IN SUNIL KUMAR V STATE. IN THE SAID DECISION THE RULING OF THE supreme COURT ARE ALSO REFERRED TO AND FOLLOWED. IN PARA 4 IT IS HELD thus: