IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4898/2015 BETWEEN 1. GOVINDAPPA S/O LATE PILLAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS 2. SARASWATHAMMA W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT ALAMBADI VILLAGE, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-562106. ... PETITIONERS (BY SMT PADMAVATHI N, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SMT V. PADMA W/O K RAGHU CHIKKANAHALLI VILLAGE ATTIBELE HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK 562107.
2. STATE BY ATTIBELE POLICE BANGALORE-562107 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R2 SRI J. HEMANTH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1-ABSENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.226/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., ANEKAL U/S 448,323,504,506 R/W 34 OF IPC IN CR. NO.169/2014 BEFORE ATTIBELE POLICE, BANGALORE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners are charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. At the crime stage, the petitioners had approached this Court by filing a Crl.P.No.6932/2014 and by order dated 02.12.2014, the said petition was dismissed permitting the petitioners to seek remedy at a later date, in case Police files the final report. Since then, respondent No.2-Police having submitted the charge sheet, petitioners have approached this Court seeking to quash the said charge sheet.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the instant proceedings are mala fide and are filed as a sequel to the civil disputes pending between the parties. There is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. According to the prosecution, the incident had taken place on 31.05.2014, but the complaint was lodged only on 11.06.2014. Respondent No.1 had earlier lodged a complaint before the Police with regard to the incident that had taken place on 31.05.2014 and the Ulsoor Police Station have registered NCR No.123/2014 on 02.06.2014. Since the allegations made against the petitioners do not constitute the alleged offences, the prosecution of the petitioners is illegal and amounts to abuse of process of Court.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 is absent. Learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.2 however has disputed the submission made by the counsel for the petitioners and would submit that the prosecution has collected supporting material in proof of the accusation made against the petitioners. The charge sheet prima facie discloses the commission of the alleged offences. Hence, there is no reason to quash the proceedings.
5. On going through the records, it is noticed that the case of the prosecution is that on 31.05.2014 at 12:30 p.m., the petitioners herein trespassed into the farmhouse of the complainant comprised in Sy.No.20/2 of Chikkanahalli Village, when the complainant was not in the house and abused and threatened CWs.4 and 5. In support of the said charge, the prosecution has relied on the statements of the eye-witnesses. Therefore, it cannot be said that the allegations made against the petitioners are false and baseless. Insofar as the delay in lodging the complaint is concerned, the said aspect could be explained and considered only during the trial. Solely on account of delay in lodging the complaint, the prosecution case cannot be thrown out. The alleged civil disputes also cannot be a reason for doubting the case of the prosecution. Pendency of the civil disputes between the parties can be a reason for false implication or for commission of the said offences. This aspect also needs to be examined only during trial.
6. Having regard to the prima facie material collected by the Investigating Agency in proof of the ingredients of the offences and the involvement of the petitioners in the alleged offences, I do not find any reason to quash the proceedings.
Hence, the petition is dismissed. The observations made in this order shall not influence the trial Court while dealing with the case.
Sd/- JUDGE PYR