SAMPATH Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, against whom P.R.C. No. 18 of 1981, is pending committal before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, No. III, Salem, for an offence under Section 124-A, I.P.C. invokes the inherent powers of this court under section 482, Cr.P.C. to quash the above proceedings.

(2.) Cr. No. 383 of 1979 was registered with the respondent, against the petitioner and others, for an offence under section 124-A, I.P.C. on the allegation- that on 1-5-1979 at about 3 30 a.m. the petitioner and the co-accused attempted to paste posters, which contained recitals which had the effect of bringing into hatred and contempt the Government established by law in India and also excite disaffection towards the Government. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner and the two co-accused. Since the petitioner was absconding, the case against him was split up and after committal the case against the two co-accused was tried by the Sessions Judge, Salem in Sessions Case No. 125 of 1982. After trial, the co-accused were acquitted. On the petitioner being apprehended, the split up case, has been taken up for committal enquiry and committal proceedings are to commence. At this stage, the petitioner has approached this Court to quash the above proceedings, invoking the Courts inherent powers.

(3.) Thiru R. Sankarasubbu, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that in view of the fact that the co-accused have been acquitted by a competent Court and the acquittal is in force, the subsequent trial against the petitioner, is in violation of the principle of issue estoppel and as such the proceedings have to be quashed. According to the learned Counsel, learned Sessions Judge, in the case against the co-accused, has given a finding that much reliance cannot be placed on the F.I.R. and the recovery also has not been established. It would not be open to the prosecution in the trial against the petitioner, to lead evidence contrary to the above finding. The findings have become final and cannot be re-canvassed, in the trial against the petitioner.