High Court quashes trial against 14th accused after co-accused acquitted in murder case

Bengaluru: In a significant order, the Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against the 14th accused in a murder case, citing parity with 13 other co-accused who were earlier acquitted by the trial court.

The order was passed by a bench headed by Justice M. Nagaprasanna while allowing a petition filed by D. Praveen, who had sought quashing of the ongoing trial against him before the City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru. Praveen contended that since all other accused in the case had already been acquitted due to lack of evidence, continuing the trial against him alone would be unjustified.

The court observed that the Sessions Court had acquitted 13 accused on August 30, 2025, after finding that the prosecution had failed to establish charges of murder, unlawful assembly and criminal conspiracy. The trial court had recorded that the investigation had not produced sufficient material evidence to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.

Taking note of these findings, the High Court held that in such circumstances, subjecting the 14th accused to a separate trial would serve no meaningful purpose. It noted that the principle of parity applies when the evidence against all accused is similar in nature. If the prosecution has failed to prove the case against 13 accused based on identical evidence, it is unlikely that the 14th accused would be convicted on the same set of facts.

The court further observed that judicial time is a valuable resource and should not be wasted on proceedings that are unlikely to yield a different outcome. Accordingly, it concluded that quashing the case against the petitioner would be appropriate in the interest of justice.

### Background of the case

The case relates to the murder of Varun (24), a resident of JP Nagar, who was allegedly hacked to death with lethal weapons on August 25, 2019. The JP Nagar Police Station had filed a charge sheet against 14 accused persons, including the petitioner Praveen.

During the trial, the Sessions Court acquitted 13 accused due to lack of credible evidence linking them to the crime. However, since Praveen had reportedly been absconding during the earlier phase of the trial, proceedings against him continued separately.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that Praveen was entitled to the same relief granted to the other accused, as the evidence and allegations were identical. On the other hand, the government counsel contended that the petitioner should face trial and secure acquittal through due process rather than seek quashing at this stage.

After considering both sides, the High Court ruled in favour of the petitioner and set aside the proceedings pending before the Sessions Court, effectively bringing the case against the 14th accused to a close.