Exoneration in adjudication can support interim protection against parallel criminal prosecution where allegations are identical.

Criminal prosecution and adjudication proceedings are independent, but exoneration on merits in adjudication on an identical set of allegations may support a claim that continuation of the criminal case is an abuse of process. The text notes that the petitioner had been exonerated in adjudication, and that this provided a prima facie basis for consideration of the second petition under Section 482 CrPC and for interim protection. The petition was admitted and interim relief was granted pending its disposal.

---

---

Issues: Whether a second petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was maintainable, and whether the petitioner was entitled to interim protection on the basis of exoneration in the adjudication proceedings.

Analysis: The order records reliance on the principle that adjudication proceedings and criminal prosecution are independent, but that where exoneration in adjudication is on merits on an identical set of allegations, continuance of the criminal prosecution may amount to abuse of process. The Court noted that the petitioner had been exonerated in the adjudication proceedings and treated this as a prima facie basis for consideration of the petition and interim relief.

Outcome: The petition was admitted and interim relief was granted in favour of the petitioner during pendency of the petition.

---