IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2443/2019 BETWEEN:
1. MOHAMMED HAFEEZ S/O ABDUL RAHIMAN AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/AT: KUKKADAKATTE MUDIPUDARKASU BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT – 574 153.
2. SMT. JAYALAKSHMI W/O DHARNAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT: LAKSHMAN PASAD BUILDING, NEAR CANARA BANK, MUDIPU, KURNAD VILALGE, BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT – 574 153.
3. AJMATH @ SYED AJMATH S/O SYED RIYAZ AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT RPC LAYOUT 9TH BLOCK, 1ST CROSS ROAD SHAMANNA GARDEN BENGALURU – 560 072.
(BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KONAJE POLICE STATION D.K. DISTRICT, REP. BY THE S.P.P.
... PETITIONERS HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. DHARNAPPA S/O VENKAPP POJARI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT: LAKSHMAN PRASAD BUILDING, NEAR CANARA BANK KURNAD VILLAGE, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT – 574 153.
(BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP FOR R-1;
... RESPONDENTS SRI. ABDUL JALEEL N., ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.82/2017 (CR.NO.147/2016) OF KONAJE POLICE STATION, D.K., DISTRICT ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BANTWAL D.K., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 109, 342, 323, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMSSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 to 4 in C.C.No.82/2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 342, 323, 506 r/w 34 of IPC by Konaje Police Station pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada, are before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
2. Gist of the prosecution case is: complainant is carrying on business of tailoring and he is married to second petitioner and second petitioner was having suspicion about conduct of complainant, since he was interacting with lady customers and as such, she used to quarrel with him. It is further alleged that first petitioner who was having a mobile shop in front of shop belong to complainant, used to visit the house of complainant and as such he has suspected of fidelity. On these amongst other grounds, he has sought for suitable action being taken against accused persons.
3. On the basis of said complaint, FIR in Crime No.147/2016 came to be registered by Konaje Police Station for the aforesaid offences and after completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed.
4. Today, an affidavit has been filed by second respondent-complainant stating thereunder that he has no objection to quash the proceedings and he has settled the dispute with accused amicably. The offences alleged against petitioners being compoundable offences and essentially it is a dispute between husband and wife hence, this Court is of the considered view that a lenient view has to be taken while considering the prayer for compounding the offences.
5. Parties are present before Court. Second respondent present before Court reiterates the contents of affidavit filed today. He submits that out of his own free will and volition, without any threat, force or coercion he has affixed his signature to the affidavit and he is not inclined to continue with the complaint lodged by him against petitioners. To establish the identities of parties present before Court, photocopies of identity cards issued by the statutory authority is produced along with the affidavit filed today. In token of having identified second respondent present before Court, learned Advocate appearing for second respondent has also affixed his signature to the affidavit.
6. In the light of aforestated facts and keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of proceedings would not sub serve the ends of justice and even if prosecution is taken to its logical end, it would not end in conviction of accused persons as the complainant himself has unequivocally expressed his no objection for quashing the proceedings pending against petitioners. As such, this Court finds there is no impediment to accept the affidavit and grant the prayer sought for.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioners in C.C.No.82/2017 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 342, 323, 506 r/w 34 of IPC by Konaje Police Station on the file of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Bantwal, Dakshina Kannada, is hereby quashed and petitioners are acquitted of the aforesaid offences.
SD/- JUDGE DR