IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8656 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
1. SAMEER @ SAMEERULLAH KHAN S/O. SAMEEULLAH KHAN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.42, N CROSS NEW GURAPPAN PALYA MADAR SAAB LAYOUT B.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 029 2. MOHAMMED MEHRAJ KHAN @ MEHRAJ S/O ISLAM KHAN AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.25, 13TH CROSS VINOBHA NAGAR, K.G.HALLI BANGALORE - 560 045 ... PETITIONERS (By Sri MOINUDDIN, ADV., FOR Sri SIRAJUDDIN AHMED, ADV.,) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ADUGODI POLICE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BANGALORE - 560 027 2. AJAM PASHA S/O LATE ANSAR PASHA 38 YEARS R/AT NO.11, MARENHALLI LR NAGAR MAIN ROAD KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 047 ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri S. CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR LODGED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.209/2018 OF ADUGODI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss.120-B, 115, 118 R/W.149 OF IPC AND SECTION 25 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT PENDING BEFORE THE VI ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard Sri Moinuddin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Sirajuddin Ahmed and Sri S. Chandrashekaraiah, learned HCGP appearing for the State.
2. Petitioners are seeking for quashing of the proceedings pending in Crime No.209/2018 registered by Adugodi Police Station against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 115, 118, 149 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. Above said proceedings have been initiated on the basis of a complaint lodged by second respondent herein – Mr. Ajam Pasha.
4. A reading of the complaint dated 15.8.2018 would clearly indicate that complainant has expressed apprehension that petitioners and other accused persons even on an earlier occasion having been released on bail by the Court had conspired to commit the murder of brother of the second respondent. The Dhobi Ghat Police on 8.8.2018, had arrested the accused persons, the petitioners herein, who had unlawfully assembled to commit dacoity with deadly weapons. On interrogation, it is elicited from them that they had planned to commit the murder of Shanawaz i.e., brother of the Complainant and same had been hatched by the petitioners herein, who had given supari to commit the murder of Shanawaz and said plot was hatched from Central Jail, Parappana Agrahara, Bengaluru. It is on the basis of said complaint the jurisdictional Police have registered the aforesaid FIR and proceeded with the investigation. If on a meaningful reading of the complaint it would disclose the alleged offence or in other words, if the complaint does not disclose any offence or it is frivolous or vexatious or oppressive, quashing of the proceedings is called for and not otherwise.
5. A mini trial is not required to be held about the material collected by the prosecution during the course of investigation by scrutinizing the same at micro level, which is not required to be considered while considering the prayer for quashing of the proceedings. However, if it appears on reading of a complaint that ingredients of the offence are not made out there would be no justification for this Court to quash the proceedings.
6. A perusal of the complaint on hand discloses prima facie offences that are alleged against the petitioners. The correctness or otherwise of said allegation has to be resolved only after trial. At the initial stage of issuance of process, it would not be open for this Court to stifle the investigation by entering into the merits of the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners-accused. Hence, contention of Mr.Moinuddin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that on the basis of an alleged false complaint, the investigation has been commenced cannot be accepted and it stands rejected. Consequently, Criminal Petition stands rejected. However, it is made clear that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the case.
Sd/- JUDGE cp*