'Permitting Trial Would Be An Exercise In Futility': Karnataka High Court Quashes 'Oldest Case' In State After 44 Yrs

Closing perhaps the oldest criminal matter in the state, the Karnataka High Court recently quashed a 44-year old murder case registered against a man who is now 68 years old, remarking that permitting a trial would be a futile exercise. 

Justice M Nagaprasanna while allowing the petition by Chadra alias V Chandrashekara Bhat, and after taking note of the facts observed that the impossibility of the petitioner looms large. It said:

“Therefore, if acquittal is eminent in a trial, permitting such trial against the accused would be nothing but waste of precious judicial time as is observed hereinabove. In the considered view of this Court, permitting a trial, which would be of no utility would only be an exercise in futility. Thus, ends the oldest case, in the criminal justice system, of the State, perhaps, which is 44 years old.”

It was alleged that on June 8,1979 the respondent Narayana Nair P and his father heard a noise in their courtyard. When he went out to see, one Seetharama Bhat and Kitta had criminally trespassed into the house and they stabbed him on the chest and back and also stabbed another person Kunhirama on his neck. The injured Kunhirama was taken to the hospital and succumbed to the injuries. Following which the police registered a case under Sections 143(punishment for unlawful assembly), 147(Punishment for rioting), 148(Rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 447(Punishment for criminal trespass), 307(Attempt to murder), 326(Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means) and 302 (murder) read with Section 149(Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object)  of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was booked as accused number 3 in the case. 

The trial court convicted Seetharama Bhat and Kitta @ Krishnappa and acquitted two other accused Sanjeeva Handa and Basava Handa. The present petitioner was similarly placed as Sanjeeva Handa and Basava Handa and there was no overact act alleged against the petitioner both in the complaint or in the charge sheet.

The petitioner contended that he was never arrested by the Police nor any summons was received by him. It was claimed that petitioner, who is 68-years old, is hunted by the respondent/Police for the reason that he has to undergo trial in a split up case drawn against him showing him to be absconding at the time of trial.

On going through the records and the trial court order acquitting two accused, the court said “The one who was convicted has completed his sentence and is also out of prison. But, who remains in a crime of 44 years old, is the present petitioner whom the concerned Court had declared absconding as he was not traceable. The petitioner has produced abundant material to demonstrate that he was employed in Bangalore and returned back to his Village. It is then, he comes to know that Police are on a hunt for him in a 44 year old case, which is split up in S.C.No.42 of 1979.”

The court noted that witnesses who deposed 44 years back are impossible to be secured to-day and the reasons rendered by the concerned Court with respect to other accused who are acquitted are straight away applicable to the petitioner.

The bench held “It would only be a waste of judicial time which is too precious today, if the petitioner is permitted to be tried 44 years after the crime. To save such precious judicial time, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the crime against the petitioner.” The court thus allowed the plea and quashed the case.

Case Title: Chandra @Chandrashekhara Bhat AND State of Karnataka

Counsel for petitioner: Advocate K.Ravishankar 

Counsel for State: HCGP Rashmi Patil

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 530

Case No: Criminal Petition no. 12758 OF 2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order