IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8031 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
LAKSHMAIAH S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.E-27, TIRPALYA, HULIMANGALA, HEBBUGODI, BOMMASANDRA, BENGALURU-560 099. …PETITIONER (BY SHRI M.SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SIRA P.S., REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.
2. UGRAPPA S/O NARSAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT JYOTHI NAGARA, SIRA TOWN, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 137. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1 SHRI K.R.RAMESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.423/2017 OF RESPONDENT SIRA POLICE STATION, TUMAKURU, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 379,420 AND 468 OF IPC WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., SIRA.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Petitioner has taken exception to registration of FIR No.423/2017 against him in Sira Police Station on 30.10.2017.
2. Respondent No.2 filed a private complaint registered as PCR.No.16/2017 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira, contending inter alia that petitioner had stolen a cheque leaf and presented the same for encashment, which resulted in loss of Rs.4,50,000/- to the complainant.
3. The learned Magistrate has referred the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, aforesaid FIR has been registered by the police.
4. Shri M.Shashidhara, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the entire allegations contained in the FIR are false. He submitted that the cheque in question was, in fact, given to one Ranganathappa. Since he does not have a bank account, he got the amount encashed through the petitioner.
5. The complaint is filed with a specific allegation that the cheque was stolen. Accordingly, FIR has been registered. The grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner and the veracity of the affidavits as per Annexures-D and E will have to be investigated into. In the circumstances, no grounds are made out to interfere with the order passed by the learned Magistrate by exercising the power vested under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
6. Learned advocate for the petitioner further submitted that Police have not recorded the statement of deponents i.e., Ranganathappa and his son Pruthvi whose affidavits have been annexed to this petition. The manner in which the investigation have to be done, is within the domain of police officers. If the petitioner has any grievance, he may approach the higher police officials in that behalf.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE PB