G VENKATARATNAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF A P
LAWS(APH)-2001-10-203
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on October 19,2001

G.VENKATARATNAM KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

AZGHAR AHMED KHAN VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(APH)-2002-10-54] [REFERRED TO]
GARLAPATI KAMAL KUMAR VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(APH)-2015-7-109] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The petitioner herein seeks to quash the proceedings initiated against him in sessions Case No.374 of 1998 on the file of the II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
(2.)The petitioner is A. 10 in the crime. The respondent-State charge sheeted as many as 11 accused in the Court of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad City, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147,148, 452, 436, 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25(lXa) and 27 of the Indian Arms Act. It was shown in the charge sheet that the accused Nos.8, 9, 10 and 11 were absconding. Initially while issuing process to the accused for their appearance before the Court, non-bailable warrant was ordered to be issued against the petitioner herein while taking charge sheet on file as PRC No. 13 of 1995. Since the warrant could not be executed, the case against the petitioner was separated. Initially the case against A2, A3, and All was separated and was committed to the Court of Session. The Sessions Court after having taken cognizance of the same in S.C .No, 111 of 1996 conducted trial and that ended in acquittal. Later, the case against A.1, A.4 and A.10 was registered as PRC No.3 of 1996. That too was committed to the Court of Session and the Sessions Court in S.C,No.202 of 1998 after having conducted trial acquitted A.1 and A.4 and convicted A. 10. The case against the petitioner remained on the file of the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, as PRC No.22 of 1997.
(3.)The petitioner herein surrendered before the Court and the case against him too was committed to the Court of Session in S.C.No.374 of 1998, which is pending on the file of the II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. The petitioner now seeks to quash the proceedings on the premise that according to the averments made in the charge sheet, there were only three eye-witnesses to the occurrence and that all the three eye-witnesses during the course of trial in S.C.No.lll of 1996 deposed that they did not know who the assailants were and none of them mentioned the name of the petitioner herein even in their previous statements and that the only allegation against the petitioner was the inadmissible confession of the co-accused who had already been acquitted by the Sessions Court. It is thus obvious that the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.374 of 1998 on the file of the II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, on the ground that there was no legal evidence against him and, therefore, there is no point in allowing the proceeding to continue, which is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court, particularly in view of the acquittal of the other accused in the case.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.