IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2399 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
1. ISHTIYAQ AHMED QASMI S/O LATE SAB JAN SAB AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.74, III CROSS, RBI EXTENSION, III BLOCK EAST, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. SYED IQBAL PASHA S/O SYED HYDER AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.74, III CROSS, RBI EXTENSION, III BLOCK EAST JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. ABDUL SUBHAN KHAN S/O LATE KHASIM KHAN SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.74, III CROSS, RBI EXTENSION, III BLOCK EAST, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 001.
4. SARDHAR PASHA S/O AMEER JAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.74, III CROSS, RBI EXTENSION, III BLOCK EAST, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 001.
5. MR. KHAJA MOHAMMED KHAN S/O MR. AHMED KHAN AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/A NO.16,2ND CROSS, 8TH MAIN, TILAK NAGAR, BANGALORE-560041.
6. SYED SAMIULLA S/O MR. SYED SHAFIULLA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.255/8, 8TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR, I BLOCK EAST, BANGALORE-560 011.
7. MR MOHAMMED FAROOQ S/O LATE ABDUL REHMAN AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.20/1, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD MAIN ROAD, BYRASANDRA, 1ST BLOCK EAST JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560011 8. S.M. ARIF S/O MR. S.A. BADSHA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.79, 5TH MAIN, LIC COLONY, 3RD BLOCK EAST, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 011.
9. M. NASIR AHMED DELVI S/O MR. H.A. MUTHIULLA DELVI, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.310, 10TH CROSS, 3RD C MAIN ROAD, I BLOCK EAST, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 011.
10. MOHAMMED AYAZUDDIN S/O LATE MOHAMMED ZIAUDDIN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.135, 1ST "A" MAIN ROAD, KASTHURI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 044.
11. MR. MOHAMMED IMTIAZ S/O MR SHAKE AMANULLA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.9091, 5TH MAIN, 34TH CROSS, YARAB NAGAR, BANASHANKARI, 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560070.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI: S A H RAZVI, ADVOCATE) AND 1. MR.IMTIAZ AHMED S/O LATE BASHEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A NO.19TH, 4TH CROSS, WILSON GARDEN BANGALORE-560021.
2. BASHA S/O LATE SAB JAN SAB, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/A NO.193, DAYANANDA NAGAR, 1ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE-560011.
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE HOSKOT E POLICE STATION BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: SHIVASHANKAR, S.K., ADVOCATE FOR R1-ABSENT R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED SRI: I.S.PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II FOR R3) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1006/2014 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, HOSKOTE, BANGALORE RURAL DIST.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned SPP-II for respondent No.3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 is absent. Respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented.
2. Petitioners have sought to quash the charge-sheet laid against them in C.C.No.1006/2014 pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Hoskote, Bengaluru Rural District, for the offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the outset, submitted that the allegations made in the charge-sheet, on the face of it, are civil in nature. According to the complainant/respondent No.1, he along with respondent No.2 entered into an agreement with Al-Mahadul Islami Charitable Trust represented by its Managing Trustee to purchase 21168 sq.ft. of land. The grievance of the complainant/respondent No.1 is that the petitioners herein have failed to abide by the terms of agreement and thereby they have cheated respondent Nos.1 & 2.
4. Learned SPP-II has argued in support of the impugned charge-sheet and would submit that the allegations made against the petitioners prima facie constitute the ingredients of section 420 of Indian Penal Code and therefore there is no reason to quash the proceedings.
5. On going through the material on record, it is seen that respondent Nos.1 and 2 entered into an agreement with Al- Mahadul Islami Charitable Trust managed by its Founder and Managing Trustee Mr.Ishtiyaq Ahmed Qasmi. The said Managing Trustee is arraigned as accused No.1. The other petitioners have signed the said agreement as consenting witnesses. In the charge-sheet, it is specifically stated that the property agreed to be purchased by respondent Nos.1 and 2 is a disputed property. According to respondent Nos.1 and 2, subsequent to execution of the agreement, the neighbours laid a claim to the said properties and accused No.1 Trust failed to resolve the rival claim made by the respondents. It is stated that respondent Nos.1 and 2 have already approached the Civil Court in O.S.No.328/2014 for injunction. The agreement of sale is not terminated. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 have sought for specific performance of the said agreement. The allegations made in the complaint prima facie indicate that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature. Under the said circumstances, respondent Nos.1 and 2 cannot seek to convert civil dispute into a criminal offence. Therefore, considering nature of the allegations made against the petitioners the impugned charge- sheet laid against the petitioners cannot be sustained.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Charge-sheet filed against the petitioners in C.C.No.1006/2014 pending before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Hoskote, Bengaluru Rural District, for the offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss