IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.G.M.PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7245/2019 BETWEEN:
ANTONY C.J. S/O JOSEPH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/O HEBBALE DEVARAPURA VILLAGE VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571 201 … PETITIONER (BY SRI MAHADEVA R.K., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER GONIKOPPA POLICE STATION GONIKOPPA CIRCLE KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX BENGALURU – 560 001 2. K.J.BABU S/O LATE JAAN AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS RESIDING AT HATHURU VILLAGE HATHURU POST KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RENUKARADHYA, HCGP FOR R-1; SMT. PRAVEENA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.81/2019 OF GONIKOPPA POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 307 OF IPC PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) & JMFC, PONNAMPET, KODAGU, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R The learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice for respondent no.1-State.
2. Smt. S.Praveena, learned counsel is permitted to file vakalat for respondent no.2-Complainant (injured).
3. Respondent no.2-Complainant is present before the Court. A joint memo is filed in Court today which is signed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as respondent no.2, who is identified by his counsel. A copy of the Aadhaar card of respondent no.2 is produced before the Court and the original Aadhaar card is made available for perusal of the Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with FIR No.81/2019 of Gonikoppa Police Station.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no.2 have stated in the aforesaid joint memo that respondent no.2 is withdrawing all the allegations made against the petitioner in the complaint filed by him and that the matter has been amicably settled between himself and the petitioner as per the advice of well wishers and elders of the village. Respondent no.2- Complainant has also submitted that by accepting the joint memo, the FIR registered against the petitioner may be quashed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the order dated 14.07.2017 passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.3916/2017 in the case of Kattera U. Jeevan vs. State of Karnataka, Station House Officer, Gonikoppa and another and the order dated 06.12.2017 passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.8999/2017 connected with Crl.P.No.9000/2017 in the case of Hameed S.A. and another vs. State of Karnataka, Station House Officer, Shanivarasanthe Police Station, Kodagu and another.
7. In the case of Kattera U. Jeevan cited supra, this Court had quashed the proceedings in Cr.No.27/2017 against the petitioner therein for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 427 of IPC on the basis of a joint memo filed by the complainant and the accused persons stating that they have amicably settled the dispute at the intervention of elders and well wishers. Accepting the same, this Court quashed the proceedings registered against the petitioner therein.
8. In the case of Hameed S.A. cited supra, this Court relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014)6 SCC 466 quashed the proceedings initiated against the petitioners therein for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 427, 506(2) r/w 34 of IPC in Crl.P.No.9000/2017 and for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 326, 307 r/w 34 of IPC in Crl.P.No.8999/2017. The facts in the case of Kattera U. Jeevan cited supra are identical with the facts in the case on hand. Since respondent no.2 – Complainant has submitted that as per the advice of the well wishers and elders of the village the matter has been amicably settled between himself and the petitioner herein, no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings registered against the petitioner. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would not sub-serve the ends of justice.
9. For the reasons stated above, I proceed to pass the following order:
Criminal Petition is hereby allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Crime No.81/2019 of Gonikoppa Police Station, Kodagu District for the offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC are hereby quashed.
Since the criminal proceedings are quashed, the petitioner/accused shall be released from judicial custody forthwith, if he is not required in any other case.
Sd/- JUDGE hkh.