IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR CRL.P. NO.8433/2019 BETWEEN 1. SMT R SUDHAMANI W/O SRINIVASAMURTHI, AGE 48YEARS R/O NO.899 VENKATASWAMY LAYOUT SARJAPURA ROAD ATTIBELE TOWN, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE.
2. SRI H SAHIM PASHA S/O LATE HASEEN KHAN MAJOR AGE 52 YEARS R/O NO.1440, NEAR MOSQUE ATTIBELE, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE-562 107 3. SRI K R SURESH BABU S/O RAMAREDDY AGE 47 YEARS R/O NO.20, DOCTOR LAYOUT SARJAPURA ROAD ATTIBELE TOWN, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE 4. SRI RAGHUNATH R S/O V RAMAIAH AGE 50 YEARS R/O NO.899 VENKATASWAMY LAYOUT SARJAPURA ROAD ATTIBELE TOWN ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI DHANANJAYA C P, ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY S P P HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ATTIBELE POLICE STATION BANGALORE-560001 2. SRI SRINIVAS MURTHY S/O LATE V LINGAPPA AGE 55 YEARS R/O SY. NO.57 INDLABELE VILLAGE BIDARAGUPPE POST ATTIBELE HOBLI BANGALORE-562107.
(BY SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1.) RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FURTHER PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2019 IN PCR.NO.303/2017 PRESENTLY IN C.C.NO.569/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANEKAL, ISSUING PROCESS TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 323,324,504,506,468,419,471 AND 355 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Petitioners are before this court being aggrieved by the order dated 28.03.2019 whereby the trial court has been pleased to take cognizance of the complaint filed by the second respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506, 468, 419, 471 and 355 read with Section 34 of IPC. In sum and substance, the allegation by the complainant against the accused is that the first accused is the wife and fifth accused who is her brother along with the other accused colluded and fabricated a GPA and in the said GPA forged the signature of the complainant in respect of which they claim a share in a family properties. That he was married to the first accused and first accused had separated from him. The trial court after looking into the material and after recording the statement and after verifying the document and after prima-facie examining the signatures on the GPA and the complaint and vakalathnama has expressed a prima-facie opinion that the offences alleged against the accused requires consideration. In that view of the matter, no error is pointed out in the order. The order taking cognizance is after application of mind with reference to the material on record. No grounds are made out, the petition stands dismissed.
3. Learned High Court Govt. Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent.
In view of dismissal of the petition, I.A.1/2019 for stay does not survive for consideration and is accordingly disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs* CT-HR