Praveen T Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Praveen T Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashment of the entire proceedings pending against the petitioner/accused No.12 in split up case CC No.20998/2022 arising from the main case CC No.18329/2021 before the XXXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bengaluru.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner (accused No.12) in the split up case in CC.No.20998/2022, pending on the file of XXXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, should be quashed.

Court's answer

The chargesheet does not indicate any specific overt act against the petitioner, who is arraigned as accused No.12.

Ratio / Principle

The learned Sessions Judge, while passing the acquittal judgment in respect of the other accused, took into consideration the hostility of the eye witnesses and other material witnesses in the case.

Key takeaways

The judgments acquitting the other accused have attained finality.ratio¶48
No purpose will be served in keeping the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner pending.ratio¶48
In order to prevent the abuse of process of the Court, it is just and proper to allow the petition.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Mohammad Nawaz, J.), CRL.P No. 8831 of 2026, decided 03.07.2026 — Petition under S. 482 Cr.P.C (S. 528 BNSS) by Praveen T. (accused No.12) ALLOWED; entire proceedings in split up case CC No.20998/2022 (arising from main case CC No.18329/2021; Crime No.188/2018, Mahalakshmi Layout P.S.; offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 302, 120B r/w 149 IPC for the murder of Manikanta @ Doddakattu, 17.06.2018) QUASHED. Grounds: the chargesheet discloses no specific overt act against the petitioner, who was arraigned only on the basis of omnibus allegations of membership of an unlawful assembly; accused Nos.1 to 11 were acquitted on 16.11.2022 (SC No.1757/2018 and SC No.995/2021) and accused No.13 on 23.02.2024 (SC No.1472/2022), the learned Sessions Judge having considered the hostility of the eye witnesses and other material witnesses, and those judgments have attained finality; proceedings against absconding accused No.14 (split up case SC No.1904/2023) had already been quashed in Crl.P.No.15887/2025, wherein this Court referred to the parity principle enunciated in Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi v. State of Gujarat, 2023 INSC 829 (para 15). Keeping the last accused's trial alive would serve no purpose and would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court; hence the proceedings were quashed.

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:33344 CRL.P No. 8831 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JULY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8831 OF 2026

BETWEEN:

PRAVEEN T. S/O THYAGARAJAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO.1410, FLAT NO.51, 12^TH CROSS, DR. SHIVARAM KARANTH NAGAR, MCEHS LAYOUT, 2^ND STAGE, K.V. JAYARAM ROAD, BENGALURU-560 064.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH M.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT P.S., BENGALURU. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.

SMT. ANJALAMMA W/O LATE MARIMUTHU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT #216, 4^TH CROSS, SANJAYGANDHI NAGARA, KAMALANAGARA, BASAVESHWARANAGARA, BENGALURU-560 086.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K., HCGP (PH))

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:33344 CRL.P No. 8831 of 2026

HC-KAR

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN SPLIT UP CASE IN CC.NO.20998/2022 ARISING FROM MAIN CASE IN CC.NO.18329/2021, PENDING ON THE FILE OF XXXII ADDL. CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 148, 302, 120(B), R/W 149 OF IPC, REGISTERED BY MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT P.S., BENGALURU, IN CRIME NO.188/2018.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is seeking to quash the entire proceedings initiated against him in a split up case in CC.No.20998/2022 pending on the file of XXXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru.

In all, 14 accused were chargesheeted for the

offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 302, 120B r/w Section 149 of IPC. Petitioner is arraigned as accused No.12. The incident took place way back on 17.06.2018 at about 6.00 p.m., wherein the accused are

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:33344 CRL.P No. 8831 of 2026

HC-KAR

alleged to have committed the murder of one Manikanta @ Doddakattu.

It is not in dispute that accused Nos.1 to 9 were

tried in SC No.1757/2018 and accused Nos.10 and 11 were tried in SC No.995/2021 by the Court of LXVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City, and the said accused were acquitted vide Judgment dated 16.11.2022. Further, accused No.13 was tried in SC No.1472/2022 and acquitted vide judgment dated 23.02.2024.

Accused No.14, who was absconding and against whom a split up case was registered, approached this Court in Crl.P.No.15887/2025. The said petition was allowed and the entire proceedings against him in split up case in SC No.1904/ 2023 was quashed.

Petitioner arraigned as accused No.12 is now

the sole accused against whom the split up case is pending

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:33344 CRL.P No. 8831 of 2026

HC-KAR

in CC No.20998/2022 on the file of the Court of XXXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bangalore.

This Court, while quashing the proceedings against accused No.14, has referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Javed Shaukat Ali Qureshi v.

State of Gujarat reported in 2023 INSC 829 . The relevant paragraph No.15 reads as under:

"When there is similar or identical evidence of eyewitnesses against two accused by ascribing them the same or similar role, the Court cannot convict one accused and acquit the other. In such a case, the cases of both the accused will be governed by the principle of parity. This principle means that the Criminal Court should decide like cases alike, and in such cases, the Court cannot make a distinction between the two accused, which will amount to discrimination."

A perusal of the chargesheet does not indicate

any specific overt act against the petitioner. He has been

arraigned as an accused on the basis of omnibus allegations that he was also a member of unlawful

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:33344 CRL.P No. 8831 of 2026

HC-KAR

assembly. The learned Sessions Judge while passing the judgment of acquittal, in respect of other accused, has taken into consideration the hostility of the eye witnesses and other material witnesses in the case. The said judgments have attained finality. This Court is of the considered view that no purpose will be served in keeping the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner pending. Hence, in order to prevent the abuse of process of the Court, it is just and proper to allow the petition. Petition is accordingly allowed.

The entire proceedings pending against the petitioner/accused No.12 in split up case in CC No.20998/2022 arising from the main case in CC No.18329/2021 on the file of XXXII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bengaluru are quashed.

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

TL

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8