IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7469 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. MOHAN KUMAR S/O. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS 2. CHANDRASHEKHARA S/O. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS 3. DINESH KUMAR S/O. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 4. JAYALAKSHAMMA W/O. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 5. KRISHNAPPA S/O. LATE CHENNIGAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 6. MAHALAKSHMI D/O. LATE RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 7. SMT. BINDU W/O. CHANDRASHEKHAR AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS PETITIONERS 1 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT CHENNIGAPPANAPALYA SOLURU HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 127.
8. RAJENDRA @ APPIRAJ S/O. LATE GOVINDAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/O. UDUKUNTE SOLURU HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 127.
…PETITIONERS (BY SHRI SACHIDANANDA MURTHY V.C., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KUDURU POLICE MAGADI, MAGADI TALUK REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.
2. SMT. BHAGYAMMA W/O. V.P. PRAKASH UDUKUNTE SOLURU HOBLI MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 127.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI S. RACHAIAH, H.C.G.P. FOR R1; R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND CHARGE SHEET REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN CRIME NO.51/2017 AND C.C.NO.348/2018 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., MAGADI.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard.
2. Petitioner No.3 has registered FIR No.50/2017 against respondent No.2 and others and Respondent No.2 lodged FIR No.51/2017 against the petitioners. Both the complaints are filed against each other alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w 149 of IPC. The Police, after investigation have filed charge sheet in both the cases. The criminal cases are pending before the learned Magistrate at Magadi Taluk, Ramanagara.
3. Shri Sachidananda Murthy V.C., learned advocate for the petitioners assailing the charge sheet submits that the complaint filed by respondent No.2 against the petitioners is false. The police have not followed the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court while conducting the investigation. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the petitioners are unsustainable. Accordingly, he prays for quashing the FIR No.51/2017.
4. Shri S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP for the State arguing in support of the charge sheets submits that both parties have lodged complaints against each other. The police, after investigation have filed the charge sheets. Learned Magistrate has already framed the charges in criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.50/2017 (C.C.No.566/2017). The allegations contained in the complaints as well as in the charge sheets are serious in nature and require trial. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of this petition.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners and learned HCGP appearing for the State.
6. Both the parties have filed the criminal complaints against each other and the police after investigation have filed the charge sheets. Learned HCGP for the State is right in his submission that complaints contain serious allegations. In the circumstances, in my considered view, trial is necessary to vindicate petitioners’ stand.
7. In the circumstances, no ground is made out to interfere by exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
Resultantly, this petition fails and it is accordingly, dismissed.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE HJ