Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Padmini Ranganathan W/O Mr Ranganathan vs State Of Karnataka

High Court Of Karnataka|25 October, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION NO.42266 OF 2019 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
Smt.Padmini Ranganathan W/o Mr.Ranganathan, Aged about 66 years, Residing at, G-401, Adarsh Palace, 47th Cross, 5th Block, Jayanagar, Bengaluru – 560 011.
(By Sri.Prashanth Kumar, Advocate for Sri.Praveen H.P., Advocate) AND State of Karnataka, Represented by Inspector of Police, Doddabelavangala Police Station, Bengaluru District, Bengaluru – 561203.
(By Sri.M.Vinod Kumar, AGA) ... Petitioner ... Respondent This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent police to expedite the process of investigation in respect of FIR No.89/2016 produced at Annexture hand file the necessary report in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 within a specified period of three months.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Sri.M.Vinod Kumar, learned AGA is directed to take notice for respondent.
2. The petitioner in the above Writ Petition sought for writ of mandamus directing the Respondent Police to expedite the process of investigation in respect of FIR No.89/2016 and submit necessary report in accordance with the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure within a period of three months.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the absolute owner of certain immovable properties bearing Sy. Nos.72/P, 72, 73/2 and 73/3 totally measuring 7 acres 20 guntas situated at Doddaankanla Village, Belavangala Hobli, Chikkaballapur Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. Petitioner is a resident of Bengaluru. Taking undue advantage of the same, one Smt.Nagamma conspired with four others and forged the signatures of the petitioner and fraudulently created an Agreement of Sale dated 01.12.2009 in her favour alleged to have been executed by the petitioner towards the sale of the said properties for a Sale Consideration of Rs.14,03,750/-. Therefore, based on the aforesaid forged Agreement of Sale dated 01.12.2009, Smt.Nagamma filed O.S.No.165/2010 before the Senior Civil Judge, Doddaballapur against the petitioner for the relief of specific performance and obtained exparte judgment and decree dated 29.11.2011 against the petitioner. Thereafter, said Smt.Nagamma filed an Execution Petition No.1/2012 and got the sale deed executed through the Court. After knowing the fraud played by said Smt.Nagamma, the petitioner filed RFA No.908/2016 before this Court challenging the exparte judgment and decree. The said matter is still pending before this Court. Thereafter, petitioner lodged a complaint before the respondent police seeking to take appropriate action against Smt.Nagamma and other accused persons. The Police registered FIR No.89/2016 dated 30.05.2016 against Smt.Nagamma and four others for offences punishable under Sections 120B, 149, 470, 420, 467, 471 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner approached the respondent police for providing all necessary information and documents as and when sought by the respondent police for conducting the necessary investigation. Despite providing all the necessary information, the respondent police have not yet completed their investigation and not yet filed the Charge Sheet against the accused in FIR No.89/2016. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court for the relief sought for.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties to the lis.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is the senior citizen aged about 66 years. On the complaint made by the petitioner, the police promptly registered FIR No.89/2016. Despite providing all necessary information, the respondent police have not yet filed charge sheet and dragging the proceedings. The petitioner filed RFA No.908/2016 before this Court. If the respondent police delayed the proceedings, the petitioner will be put to great hardship. Therefore, the petitioner sought to allow the writ petition directing the respondent police to expedite the investigation as prayed for.
7. Per contra, on taking notice to the respondents, Sri.M.Vinod Kumar, learned AGA on instructions submits that the investigation is under progress and concerned documents have been sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Madiwala, Bengaluru. The matter is under investigation and investigation to be completed within a period of four months.
8. The said fair submission is placed on record.
9. In view of the above, without adverting merits and demerits, it would suffice to direct the respondent police to expedite process of investigation in FIR No.89/2016 dated 30.05.2016 and submit Final Report before the appropriate Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order without seeking any further adjournments. Investigation should be made strictly in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE NBM
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt Padmini Ranganathan W/O Mr Ranganathan vs State Of Karnataka

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
25 October, 2019
Judges
  • B Veerappa