IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA Crl.P. No. 4585/2013 BETWEEN :
1. Smt. R.H. Kasthuri Major in age W/o. Sri. C. Shivakumar Reddy R/o. the premises bearing No. 14, Ramanashree 29th Main, 2nd Stage BTM Layout Bangalore – 560 076.
2. Sri. N.M. Ganesh Major in age S/o. M.A. Monnappa No. 215, 2nd Main Ilyas Nagar J.P. Nagar 6th Phase Bangalore – 560 078. … PETITIONERS (By Sri. C.V. Nagesh, Sr. Adv., a/w Sri. K. Raghavendra, Adv.) AND :
1. State of Karnataka Station House Officer Anekal Police Station Bangalore Rural District Bangalore.
2. Sri. Ramesh Babu Major in age S/o. Sri. Gopal Reddy Resident of Surajakkanahalli Village Kasaba Hobli Anekal Taluk Bangalore District. … RESPONDENTS (By Sri. Nasrulla Khan, HCGP, for R-1 R-2 served - unrepresented) ---
This Crl.P. is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the FIR in Cr.No. 77/2013 registered at Anekal P.S. Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, pending before the Addl. C.J. (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Anekal, Bangalore for offences which are made penal under Section 447, 427, 504, 506 and 34 of IPC on the basis of the complaint of second respondent and etc.
This Crl.P. coming on for Admission this day, the Court passed the following;
O R D E R Petitioners have sought to quash the FIR registered against them in crime No. 77/2013 for the offences punishable under Section 447, 427, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC.
2. The complainant is one Sri. Ramesh Babu.
According to the complainant, he had grown Banana plantation in his property/premises in survey No. 104/1 of Surajakkanahalli Village measuring 2 acres. Abutting his property the petitioners herein had erected a compound wall. On 09.03.2013 the compound wall collapsed and when the complainant went to enquire, accused No. 1 – Wing Commander V.K. Vasudev abused and threatened him.
3. A bare perusal of the complaint would indicate that compound wall was erected by the petitioners. It is not the case of the complainant that the said compound wall collapsed on account of any deliberate act of the petitioners. On the other hand according to the complainant he was growing banana plantation and was watering the lands regularly. Therefore, the allegations made against the petitioners that on account of mischief played by the petitioners the compound wall collapsed cannot be accepted. The word `mischief’ is defined under Section 425 of IPC and it reads as under:
425. Mischief.- Whoever with intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously, commits “mischief”.
4. From the facts averred in the complaint it is clear that petitioners herein have not done any act either with knowledge or intention to cause damage to the compound wall. On the other hand the facts averred in the complaint indicate that the complainant himself was growing banana plantation in the land. Therefore, in my view, the provisions of Section 427 do not get attracted to the facts of the case. Likewise, there is no averment whatsoever in the complainant that the petitioners had trespassed into the lands of the complainant so as to attract the provisions under Section 447 of the Act. According to the complainant it is he who approached accused No. 1 to question about the wall and accused No. 1 abused and threatened him. Therefore, none of the offences alleged in the FIR get attracted. As such, prosecution of the petitioners for the above offences being wholly illegal and an abuse of process of Court, cannot be sustained.
5. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. The FIR registered against the petitioners in crime No. 77/2013 pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Anekal, Bengaluru is hereby quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE.
LRS.