IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7982/2013 Between:
1. Ramesha S/o Babu, Aged about 41 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District-577122.
2. Monappa. A.S. S/o Shambu, Aged about 36 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District-577122.
3. Rajesha. G S/o Guruva, Aged about 21 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District-577122.
4. Krishnappa S/o Rukmayya, Aged about 24 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District-577122.
5. G.Ravi S/o Guruvappa, Aged about 23 years, Coolie, R/o. Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District-577122.
6. Saneeva S/o Shinkra, Aged about 46 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District – 577122.
7. Vinoda, S/o Guruvappa, Aged about 45 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District – 577122.
8. Guruva, S/o Angara, Aged about 55 years, Coolie, R/o Balur Village, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District – 577122.
(By Sri.Suyog Herde E, Advocate for Sri.Aruna Shyam M, Advocate) And:
1. The State of Karnataka Rep. Balur Police Station, Chikmagalur, Rep by its State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru – 560001.
… Petitioners 2. B S Ramesh, S/o Late Somegowda, Aged about 40 years, R/o Jiraytu, Channadlu, Balur Hobli, Moodigere Taluk, Chikmagalur District – 577122.
(By Sri I.S.Pramod Chandra, SPP – II for R.1 and Sri.A.N.Radhakrishna, Advocate for R.2) ...Respondents This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the entire proceedings in S.C.No.59/2013 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur and etc., This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R The petitioners have sought to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.59/2013 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chikmagalur.
2. The grounds urged in the petition are that the complaint does not disclose the offences much less the offences alleged against the petitioners. There are no materials to hold that the petitioners have committed the alleged offences. The filing of the complaint is an abuse of the process of the Court. The 1st petitioner had filed a complaint in Crime No.35/2012 against the 2nd respondent and others. The instant case is therefore a counterblast to the above complaint. Further, it is contended that with malafide intention, just to harass and tarnish the image of the petitioners, a false and frivolous complaint has been filed against them.
3. On perusal of the materials, it is noticed that the FIR was registered against eight accused persons and others under Sections 143, 144, 147, 148, 504, 323, 324, 307 and 506 read with section 149 of IPC. In the complaint, it is specifically alleged that during the incident, the accused persons assaulted the complainant and other prosecution witnesses with a kathi and wooden reaper causing injuries. During investigation, sufficient material has been collected in proof of the said charge. Weapons used for the commission of the offences are seized, blood stained clothes of the injured are recovered and the wound certificates relating to three injured persons were also collected in support of the charges levelled against the petitioners. Therefore, it cannot be said that the prosecution initiated against the petitioners is false and baseless or counterblast to the complaint alleged by respondent No.2 as contended in the petition. On the other hand, the very assertion made by the petitioners that in respect of the very same incident, a counter case has been registered at the instance of 2nd respondent would indicate that the occurrence had taken place as contended by the prosecution. Therefore, the matter requires to be tried by the jurisdictional Court and hence, no grounds to quash the proceedings.
For the above reasons, the petition is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE NBM/KG