IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9162 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
L. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O. LATE LAKKAPPA M. AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, NO.24/3, 1ST CROSS, SARASWATHI PURAM, ULSOOR, BANGALORE-560 008.
(BY SRI: P B RAJU, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY INDIRA NAGAR TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE-560 038, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. SRI MUNIRAJU N S/O NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO.285, POOJAM, MA TEMPLE, NEAR SANTOSH GEMY, S.G.PALYA, BANGALORE CITY KARNATAKA-560093.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP. FOR R1; R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR. NO.243/2016 ON THE FILE OF MMTC-I, MAYO HALL, BENGALURU FILED UNDER SECTIONS 134(A & B), 187 OF THE INDIAN MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AND UNDER SECTIONS 304A AND 279 OF IPC (ANNEXURE-A) AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.3.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioner herein is sought to be prosecuted on the ground that he was the registered owner of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-32H-2591 involved in a motor vehicle accident.
2. A perusal of the records disclose that the accident occurred on 1.09.2016. At the time of the accident, accused No.1 was driving the said motor cycle. A girl was sitting as pillion. While accused No.1 was wheeling the motor cycle, the pillion rider fell on the road and she was run over by the driver of a tanker, who is arraigned as accused No.2. Petitioner herein is implicated as accused No.3 solely on the ground that he was the registered owner of the aforesaid two wheeler.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on Form No.29 collected by the investigating agency would submit that the said document on the face of it indicates that as on the date of the accident, the vehicle in question was standing in the name of one V. Amaresh. Said owner has signed Form No.29, wherein it is stated that the vehicle in question was sold and delivered to the petitioner herein on 07.09.2016.
4. Though learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the signature of the petitioner was taken on Form No.29 on 16.09.2016 after his arrest in connection with the above case, notwithstanding the said dispute, from the documents relied on by the prosecution, it can be safely held that the petitioner was not the owner of the said vehicle as on the date of the alleged accident and hence the prosecution of the petitioner is wholly illegal.
5. Petitioner being not the registered owner of the motor cycle as on the date of the accident, in my view, the prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offences under Sections 279, 304A of Indian Penal Code and Sections 134A, 134B and 187 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is wholly illegal and an abuse of the process of Court.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Crime No.243/2016 pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate(Traffic Court-I), Bengaluru are quashed insofar as the petitioner is concerned. Investigation shall be proceeded with against accused Nos.1 and 2 in accordance with law.
In view of disposal of the main matter, I.A.No.1/18 for vacating stay does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
*mn/-
Sd/- JUDGE