Allowed

H Hamza v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Aug 2023CRL.P/951/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal petition seeking to quash proceedings against the petitioner accused of cheque-related offences under the IPC and Special Bank Notes Act. The court ruled that implicating the petitioner solely based on uncorroborated statements of co-accused was an abuse of process, as per Section 114 Illustration (b) of the Evidence Act.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in CC No. 1086/2022 against the petitioner, accused No. 1, pending before JMFC VI Court, Mangaluru, are quashed.

H Hamza Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:26846 CRL.P No. 951 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 951 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

H. HAMZA S/O HAMAD SAB AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT 18/70, NEHARUNAGARA 1ST CROSS, NEAR GOVT. SCHOOL SAGARA SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 201.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. SATHISHA D.J., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BARKE POLICE STATION CENTRAL SUB DIVISION MANGALURU CITY REP. BY HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001.

¶13

SRI HARUN AQTHER AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS POLICE SUB INSPECTOR (L AND O) BARKE POLICE STATION BARKE MANGALURU CITY MANGALURU-574 147.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. H.S. SHANKAR, HCGP FOR R-1)

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:26846 CRL.P No. 951 of 2023

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1086/2022 AT ANNEXURE-C PENDING ON THE FILE OF J.M.F.C. - VI COURT, MANGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 511, 34 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 5 AND 7 OF SPECIAL BANK NOTES (CESSATION OF LIABILITIES) ACT, 2017 IN PURSUANCE OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.50/2021, DATED 18.11.2021 AND SUBSEQUENT CHARGE SHEET DATED 16.09.2022, AGAINST THIS PETITIONER IN CONCERNED.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petitioner is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 511, 34 of IPC and Sections 5, 7 of the Special Bank Notes (Cessation of Liabilities) Act, 2017.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that, when the accused Nos.2 to 4 were transporting banned notes in Innova vehicle, and upon search, it was found that, the banned notes were in their possession and were seized. The banned notes, which were seized from the accused Nos.2 to 4, belonged to the accused No.1.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner - accused No.1 submits that, the accused No.1 has been implicated solely on the basis of statement of co-accused i.e. accused Nos.2 to 4. In the absence of any corroborative material that the banned notes belonged to the accused No.1, the cognizance taken of the aforesaid offences is impermissible.

¶23

NC: 2023:KHC:26846 CRL.P No. 951 of 2023

¶24

¶25

The learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 - State submits that, whether the banned notes belonged to the accused No.1 or not is the matter, which requires to be considered at the time of trial and at this stage, the veracity of the allegation against the accused No.1 cannot be gone into, and sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶26

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel

¶27

for the parties.

¶28

The accused No.1 has been implicated solely on the basis of the statement of co-accused i.e. accused Nos.2 to 4, who, on interrogation, have allegedly stated the banned notes belonged to the accused No.1. Section 114 Illustration (b) of the Indian Evidence Act specifies that, the statement of an accomplice is unworthy or credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars. In the instant case, except the statement of co-accused, there is no corroborative material to substantiate that the banned notes, which were seized from the accused Nos.2 to 4, belonged to the accused No.1. Hence, the continuation of criminal proceeding will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶29

ORDER

¶30

i) Criminal petition is allowed.

¶31

ii) The impugned proceeding in CC No.1086/2022 pending on the file of the JMFC VI Court, Mangaluru, insofar as it relates to the petitioner - accused No.1 is hereby quashed.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2023:KHC:26846 CRL.P No. 951 of 2023

¶34

iii) The learned Magistrate to proceed against the accused Nos.2 to 4 on the basis of available material on record without being influenced by any of the observation made in this order. The observation, if any, made in this order is only for the purpose of present petition.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

BKM

H Hamza v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H Hamza v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Garudappa. v Vs State of Karnataka

Ratish M Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Siddalingappa Vs the State of Karnataka

N Srilakshmi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Radhakrishna Kamath, Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Srikrishnadevarayalu Vs the State of Karnataka