SRI MANJUNATHA B Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned High Court Government Pleader who takes notice for the first respondent - State. Perused the records.

(2.) The petitioner has sought for quashing of the entire proceedings in CC No.20502/2014 arising out of Crime No.269/2013 of Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the other co-accused have already been acquitted by the trial Court in SC No.331/2016 vide judgment dated 1.10.2016. It is contended that the allegations made against the petitioner and the other co-accused who are acquitted are one and the same and they are in-separable and intrinsically twined up with the factual aspects. Therefore, he contended that the benefit of judgment of acquittal has to be extended so far as the petitioner is concerned who was arrayed as A-

(3.) originally and split up later due to his absence. 3. Before adverting to the factual aspects of this case, it is worth to refer a decision of this reported in AIR 2005 SC 268 in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Akhilesh Singh, wherein, it was held that: