IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BAJANTHRI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2752 OF 2019 Between:
1. Smt. Anitha W/o Satish Kashyap, Aged about 56 years, 2. Sri. Satish Kashyap S/o Jayaram, Aged about 60 years, 3. Sri. Vignesh Shishir S/o Sri. Satish Kashyap, Aged about 30 years, All are R/at No.190, 19th C Main Road, 1st Block, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560 010. …Petitioners (By Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, Advocate) And:
1. State of Karnataka By Sanjayanagara PS, Bengaluru, Represented by State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru.
2. Smt. Ayamma .M W/o Raju Mari Hegade, Aged about 29 years, R/at No.1419, 7th Cross, 13th Main Road, HAL 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 560 008. ...Respondents (By Smt. K.P. Yashodha, HCGP for R-1) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the FIR against the petitioners in PCR No.13675/2018 pending on the file of the Court of the VIII A.C.M.M., Bengaluru (FIR in Cr. No.237/2018) on the file of the Sanjaynagar Police) for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 506 r/w 34 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER The petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:
“a) Call for the relevant records;
b) Allow this Criminal Petition by quashing the First Information Report against the Petitioners in P.C.R. No.13675/2018 pending on the file of the Court of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, (FIR in Crime No.237/2018 on the file of Sanjaynagar Police) for the offences punishable under Sections 120 (B), 420, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC; and c) Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.”
2. Perusal of paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of PCR, prima-facie it is evident that there were allegations, which attract offences under Section 120B, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
3. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in AIR 2019 SC 847 at paragraph No.9 has held as under:
“9. Having heard the learned Senior Counsel and examined the material on record, we are of the considered view that the High Court ought not to have set aside the order passed by the Trial Court issuing summons to the Respondents. A perusal of the complaint discloses that prima facie, offences that are alleged against the Respondents. The correctness or otherwise of the said allegations has to be decided only in the Trial. At the initial stage of issuance of process it is not open to the Courts to stifle the proceedings by entering into the merits of the contentions made on behalf of the accused. Criminal complaints cannot be quashed only on the ground that the allegations made therein appear to be of a civil nature. If the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused are prima facie made out in the complaint, the criminal proceedings shall not be interdicted.”
In view of the aforesaid decision read with allegations stated in paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the PCR, petitioners have not made out a case. Accordingly, petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE MBM