THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.11819 of 2011 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.314 of 2009 on the file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, initiated for the offence punishable under Section 365 r/w 34 of IPC. Heard. It is stated in the petition that the respondent filed a charge sheet before the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad, in Crime No.156 of 2003 against the petitioner and four others under Section 365 r/w 34 IPC and subsequently the case was split up from the original calendar case No.491 of 2006 against the petitioner herein i.e., split-up- C.C.No.314 of 2009 which is pending before the trial court; that the original Calendar Case No.491 of 2006 ended with acquittal against the accused Nos.2,4 and five others after full pledge trial on 25.9.2009. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent falsely implicated the petitioner in the above case and he is no way connected with the alleged offences and hence he prays to allow the petition. On perusal of the judgment dated 25.9.2009 passed by the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad in C.C.No.491 of 2006, it is clear that A.2, A.4 and A.5, are found not guilty for the offence punishable under Section 365 r/w 34 IPC and consequently they were acquitted on the following grounds: “8. The very victim who is the right person to speak the facts in a befitting manner was not examined by the prosecution for want of his present whereabouts. Like wise his wife who set the criminal law into motion with a report to Police, Tukaramgate also could not be examined for want of her whereabouts. The non-examination of these two material witnesses is making all the difference to the prosecution’s case. 9. The P.W.3 is the main investigating officer and P.W.2 is the investigating officer and in their respective evidence, the P.Ws.2 and 3 have deposed about the investigation of the crime. More particularly the P.W.3 deposed about his recording the confession-cum-seizure panchanama of A.2 and A.4 and the confession statement of A3 and A5 and his making seizure of two cell phones from the possession of A2 and A4 and which phones were said to be used by them in committing the offence. This P.W.3 being a seasoned police officer perfectly deposed the contents of the panchanamas, but no independence corroboration is there to his evidence.” In view of the above, the proceedings pending against the petitioner/A.1 in C.C.No.314 of 2009 pending before the trial court, can also be quashed. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C.No.314 of 2009, on the file of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad against the petitioner/A.1. Miscellaneous Petitions filed in this Criminal Petition, if any, shall stand closed. _________________ RAJA ELANGO,J Date:23.11.2011. Gk. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.11819 of 2011 Date: 23.11.2011. Gk.