CRL.P/2473/2026 of MOHAMMED KAIF SHEIKH Vs THE STATE, on 15 July 2026

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before the court seeking quashment of the proceedings, in Split-up C.C. No. 610/2025, (Crime No.78/2024 of Udupi Town Police Station) pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Udupi.

2. Heard Smt. Haleema Ameen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Waheeda M.M.,

HC-KAR

learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent- State.

3. The petitioner is accused No.3 who is drawn into the web of proceedings along with all other accused initially in Crime No.78/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 365, 324, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of IPC.

4. The Police conducted investigation and filed a charge sheet against all the accused in C.C. No.4798/2024. The petitioner-accused no. 3 was not available for trial at the relevant point in time. The others who were available for trial were tried by the learned Magistrate in C.C.No.4798/2024, the accused who were availed with trial were tried and on the following reasons were acquitted of the offences. The order of acquittal qua, the accused no. 1, 4 and 5 reads as follows:

11) Point No.1 to 7 : These points are inter-linked with each other, hence in order to avoid repetition of facts and observation are taken for common discussion.

HC-KAR

It is the case of the prosecution that on 17-04-2024 at about 12.15 hours, at small distance from Shoe Palace near Alankar Calkies, Moodanidamboor Village, Udupi Taluk, the accused persons have wrongfully restrained CW1 by using force. voluntarily assaulted him by causing injuries through Cigarate and kicked him on his private parts, abused him in filthy language and later he was abducted in Swift car registration No. KA 20 MD 6879 and abused him and thereby gave provocation with intention or knowing it to be likely that such provocation would cause them to break the public peace and hence the accused have committed the criminal intimidation by threatening the life of CW1 with dire consequences and thereby it is alleged that the accused persons have committed aforesaid offences.

12) In order to prove its case the prosecution examined 3 witnesses as P.W1 to P.W3 and marked 9 documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P9.

13) C.W1/ Mohammed Nasir is examined as P.W1 who is the complainant and victim of this case. He deposed that no incident has taken place, he has not given any complaint before police and he does not know anything about the case. Learned APP treated the witness as hostile and cross-examined the witness with the permission of the court. He denied the suggestion that on 7-4-2024 at 8.30 a.m., in order to come to Udupi he boarded A.M.S. bus

HC-KAR

since there was no seats he was standing in the bus when bus came near Pangala, the driver put breaks and since he was not able to control he fell on a woman. He further denied that the said girl abused him in filthy language and intimated the same through phone to some unknown person When he was proceeding near Alankar Talkies one Ashpak telephoned him and abused him in filthy language. He further denied that at 12.15 p.m, when he went have tea at Triveni hotel accused No.1 restrained him and abducted him in a car and taken him to a cross near City hospital, assaulted him, causing burning injuries through cigarate and left him there later he went to Ajjarkad hospital, and while taking treatment police came to hospital and recorded his statement.

14) C.W2/Mohammed Siddik is examined as P.W2 who is the eye and mahazar witness of this case. He deposed that around some years back police came near his shop and obtained his signature. He does not know the contents of the documents, and he does not know anything about this case.

15) Learned APP treated the witness as hostile and cross- examined the witness with the permission of the court. He denied the suggestion that on 7-4-2024 at 11.00 a.m., PW1 received a phone call and he was disturbed, upon enquiry he told in morning in order to come to Udupi he boarded A.M.S. bus since there was no seats he was standing in the bus when bus came near Pangala, the

HC-KAR

driver put breaks and since he was mot able to control he fell on a woman. He further denied that e informed that the said girl abused him in filthy language ad intimated the same through phone to some unknown son. In around 12 noon when he along with PW1 was proceeding to have tea at Triveni hotel accused No.1 has restrained PW1 and abducted him in a car and taken him to a cross near City hospital, assaulted him, causing burning injuries through cigarette, later he went to search him and after seeing him he immediately informed to his uncle and later he was admitted to Ajjarkad hospital.

16) C.W4/ Alnaz Begum is examined as P.W3 who is the circumstantial witness of this case. She deposed that she was studying in PPC college, and she is used to travel in bus, one day a boy from their Village fell on her in bus, he asked sorry and after that nothing has happened and she has not given any statement.

Learned APP treated the witness as hostile and cross-examined the witness with the permission of the court. She denied the suggestion that on 7-4-2024 at 8.30 a.m., in order to come to Udupi she boarded A.M.S. bus since there was no seats she was standing in the bus when bus came near Pangala, the driver put breaks one boy fell on her, she further denied that she abused him in filthy language and intimated the same through phone to accused No.1 and later she came to know accused No.1 has assaulted CW1 and in this regard she has given statement.

HC-KAR

17) It is pertinent to note that, in the above case the PW1 wh the the complainant and victim, PW2 is the eye witness in above case have completely turned hostile to the case of rosecution. PW3 is the circumstantial witness she has Erned the case of the prosecution. In criminal case mplainant/victim not easily give up their case. But in the above case, case, the PW1 has testified that, the accused persons have not assaulted him, nor wrongfully restrained him and formed unlawful assembly against him. In order to prove the story the prosecution has examined PW2 and 3 but they have also did not support the case of the prosecution and though they were subjected to cross- examination by APP nothing worthful is elicited from their mouth. As there is no materials available on record against the accused, I am of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the allegations leveled against the accused. Therefore, the benefit of doubt shall be given to the accused. Hence, I answer the Points No.1 to 7 in the Negative.

18) Point No.8:- In view of findings on point No. 1 to 5 in the negative, I proceed to pass the following;

-:ORDER:-

In exercising the powers conferred under section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the accused No.1, 4 and 5 are hereby acquitted for the offences punishable

HC-KAR

Under Sec. 143, 147, 341, 324, 365, 504 and 506 R/w 149 of IPC.

The bail bond and surety bond of accused stands canceled.

The bail bond of the accused and surety furnished under section 437(A) of Cr.P.C. shall be in force for period of six months."

5. The petitioner cannot be alleged of any separate act as the allegations would pertain to an act that is done by all of them together. If that be the case, permitting further trial only for an eventuality of an acquittal would become wastage of precious judicial time.

6. In that light, I deem it appropriate to exercise my jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS and obliterate the proceedings against the petitioner for the foresaid reasons, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The criminal petition is allowed.

HC-KAR

(ii) The impugned proceedings in Split-up C.C.No.610/2025 (Crime No.78/2024 of Udupi Town Police Station) pending before the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Udupi, qua the petitioner herein stand quashed.

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

HR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44