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.8751 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
SHRI. M.V. RAMESH BABU S/O LATE C.S. VENKATARAMANASWAMY @ C.S.V SWAMY AGED 53 YEARS PRESENTLY AT ‘ARASU BUILDING’ NO.260, MAHILA SAMAJ ROAD 3RD CROSS, ASHOKNAGAR MANDYA-571 401 … PETITIONER (BY SHRI. B.M. ARUN, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY VIJAYANAGAR POLICE VIJAYANAGAR BANGALORE-560 040 BY ITS STATION HOUSE OFFICER REPRESENTED BY THE STATE S.P.P HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-1 ... RESPONDENT (BYSHRI. NASRULLA KAHN, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO COMPLAINT DATED 19.07.2002 FILED BY THE LATE C.R.VENKATARAMANA REDDY, VIDE ANNEXURE A BEFORE THE RESPONDENT VIJAYANAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE. C.C.NO.3609/2004 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.413/2002 FILED BY RESPONDENT POLICE, VIDE ANNEXURE C BFORE THE V A.C.M.M., BANGALORE FOR AN OFFENCE U.S 420 OF IPC. (d) PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.3609/2004 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE-D FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 420 OF IPC, AGAINST THE PETITIONER.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER One C.R. Venkataramana Reddy filed a complaint on 20.07.2002 in Vijayanagar Police Station, Bengaluru, alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC against three persons. After investigation, police have filed charge sheet alleging offence under Section 420 of IPC.
2. Shri B.M.Arun, learned advocate for petitioner submits that complaint has been filed requesting the police to recover money, which the complainant had allegedly paid to the petitioner’s father. Complainant passed away in the year 2006. Petitioner’s father, who is arrayed as accused No.1 also passed away on 07.11.2010. Petitioner’s parents filed CRL.P.No.3406/2009 before this Court. By order dated 06.11.2012, proceedings against petitioner’s mother have been quashed. There are absolutely no allegations against the petitioner as also his mother. Therefore, petitioner’s case is identical to that of his mother. Accordingly, he prays for quashing criminal proceedings on the ground of parity.
3. Shri Nasrulla Khan, learned HCGP, in his usual fairness, does not dispute the facts stated by the learned advocate for petitioner.
4. I have carefully considered the submissions of learned advocate for petitioner, learned HCGP and perused the records.
5. In substance, it is stated in the complaint that initially a sum of Rs.50,000/- was paid by complainant’s daughter-in-law, Smt. Shantha and in all a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- has been paid to petitioner’s father. The prayer made in the complaint is to recover the amount paid by the complainant. The facts stated in the complaint are reflected in the charge sheet. Averments made in the complaint do not allege any specific overt-act on the part of the petitioner. This Court, in CRL.P.No.3406/2009 filed by petitioner’s mother has recorded that even if the entire charge sheet is accepted as true, the same does not constitute any offence against petitioner’s mother. The case of the petitioner is identical to that of his mother. In the circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in continuing criminal proceedings against petitioner.
6. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and it is allowed. All proceedings in C.C.No.3609/2004 arising out of FIR.No.413/2002 registered in Vijayanagar Police Station, pending on the file of V A.C.M.M., Bengaluru, are quashed.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV