IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3771/2013 BETWEEN:
P.V. Shantha Bai D/o Late Natesh Modaliyar, Aged about 70 years, Market Road, Chikmagalur City-577 101.
Now residing at No.45, Seetharaman Street, Kosapet, Vellore Town, Tamil Nadu-632 001.
(By K.S.Ganesha, Advocate)) AND State of Karnataka By Excise Inspector, Chikmagalur City-577 101. (By Sri. Nasrulla Khan, HCGP) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the proceedings started against the petitioner in C.C.No.986/2012 before the Prl. C.J. and J.M.F.C., Chikmagalur.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner is accused No.2 in C.C.No.986/2012 pending on the file of Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Chickmagalur. The allegation against the petitioner is that huge quantity of illicit liquor was found in the property owned by the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the fact that petitioner is the owner of the said premises, wherein, illicit liquor was found. However, he contends that the said premises was the subject matter of Agreement of Sale dated 08.10.1984. The purchasers filed a suit in O.S.No.149/1987 for specific performance of the Agreement of sale. The petitioner herein filed a counter claim for possession of the property. The suit filed by the agreement holders for specific performance was dismissed, whereas the claim of the petitioner was allowed. Against the said order, R.F.A.No.396/1998 c/w R.F.A.Nos.391 & 392/2003 were filed by the purchasers but the appeals filed by the agreement holders were dismissed. The petitioner filed Execution Petition No.131/2009 and at that stage, one Swamy claiming to be the sub-tenant approached this Court and by order dated 27.09.2013 passed in W.P.Nos.44216-217/2013 (GM-CPC), time was granted to said Swamy to vacate the premises till 10.07.2014.
3. The petitioner has produced only the certified copy of the orders passed in R.F.A.No.396/1998 and the copy of the order passed in W.P.Nos.44216-217/2013. The aforesaid Swamy, who claims to be the sub-tenant of the premises is not a party to the R.F.A. proceedings, which goes to show that the said Swamy did not claim to be the sub-tenant of the property till the disposal of R.F.A. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner herein at any place contended that the property in question was in the possession of the sub-tenant. The certified copy of the order sheet in Execution Petition No.131/2009 also indicate that the execution is levied against Smt.Janaki and Sri.Janardhan and not against Swamy. All these circumstances go to show that a collusive order is obtained by the petitioner to defeat the criminal proceedings initiated against her.
4. Without there being any material to show that the aforesaid Swamy was in actual possession and enjoyment of the property of the premises in question as on the date of the commission of the offence, in my view, the contention urged by the petitioner cannot be considered as a ground to quash the proceedings. The said contention at the most may have to be considered by the trial court. Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the trial court.
5. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Srl.