IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.3278 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
1. SRI. B.S. MANJUNATH S/O SAMBASHIVAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS CHAIRMAN, SNEHA SANGAMA SOUHARD PATTIN SAHAKARI LD., TUMAKUR R/A OPP. BABY MILK DIARY CHICKPET, TUMKUR-572 101 2. SRI. K.S. MANJUANTH S/O SHIVAKUMAR MANAGER SNEHA SANGAMA SOUHARD PATTIN SAHAKARI LD., TUMAKUR R/A UAJAMANARA STREET CHICKPET, TUMKUR-572 101 … PETITIONERS (BY SHRI. VEERANNA G. TIGADI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI. D.N. PARSHVANATH S/O LATE NEMIRAJ AGED 60 YEARS R/O NO.82, GROUND FLOOR 8TH CROSS, LOWER PALACE ORCHARDS SADASHIVANAGAR BENGALURU-560 003 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE SADASHIVANAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP FOR R-2;
SHRI. SURESH G. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R-1) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT FIR REGISTERD IN SADASHIVANAGAR POLICE STATION IN CR.NO.123/2018 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 423,207,418,419,406,409,417,415,416,405,420 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE IV A.C.M.M., BANGALORE AND BY ACQUITTING THEM OF ALL THE CHARGES LEVELLED AGAINST THEM.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard Shri Veeranna G.Tigadi, learned advocate for the petitioners, Shri S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP for the respondent-State and Shri Suresh G.Hegde, learned advocate for respondent No.1.
2. Accused No.1 to 3 had agreed to sell immovable property to the complainant. Complainant entered into two separate agreements both dated 01.12.2016 and initially paid a part consideration of Rs.15,00,000/-. The complainant paid a further consideration of Rs.6,00,000/-. The accused No.1 failed to honour his commitment as per the terms of agreement and accordingly, complainant has filed O.S.No.120/2017 in the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Gubbil.
3. In the meanwhile, accused No.1 offered to sell pomegranate fruits grown by him in Maruhole village in Tumkur District for Rs.52,00,000/-. When complainant expressed his inability to arrange large funds to purchase pomegranate fruits, accused No.1 offered to help him to raise loan from the bank namely Sneha Sangama Souhard Pattin Sahakari Ltd., of which he claimed to be a Director. The complainant, believing the words of accused No.1, signed several documents. In May 2017, he was informed that Rs.75,00,000/- has been sanctioned by the bank. On 08.05.2017, Accused No.1 acting in collusion with accused No.4 got Rs.75,00,000/- released into complainant’s account. On the same day, accused No.1 had executed an agreement agreeing to sell pomegranate produced for Rs.52,00,000/- and got the said sum transferred into his account. Subsequently, complainant learnt that accused No.1 had no connection with the pomegranate orchard. When complainant approached accused No.1, he promised to resolve the issue. However, he demanded a further sum of Rs.8,00,000/- which the complainant paid. The accused No.1 to 3 failed to either acquire interest in the pomegranate orchard or refund the money received from the complainant. With these allegations, complainant approached the Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru, with a complaint. The Commissioner endorsed the complaint to the Police Inspector, Sadashivanagar for further action as per law. Accordingly, FIR No.123/2018 has been registered on 06.08.2018. Petitioners have challenged the FIR in this criminal petition.
4. Shri Veeranna G.Tigadi submitted that the complainant and accused Nos.1 to 3 have entered into a compromise and proceedings against accused Nos.1 to 3 have been quashed by this Court in Crl.P.No.6979/2018.
5. Admittedly, complainant has entered into an agreement to purchase the property as well as pomegranate produce from accused Nos.1 to 3. Perusal of the complaint prima facie does not disclose any offence against the petitioners who are bank officials. However, both learned advocates submit that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and filed a Joint affidavit of even date. They pray that this petition be disposed of in terms of settlement recorded in the Joint affidavit.
6. Petitioners and first respondent are present and identified by their respective advocates. The joint affidavit is duly signed by the petitioners, first respondent and their respective advocates. Both petitioners and respondent No.1 admit the terms of settlement stated in the joint affidavit. The same is lawful and hence accepted. The joint affidavit reads as follows:
”JOINT AFFIDAVIT We, B.S.MANJUNATH (1st Petitioner/Accused no.4) S/o. Sambashivaiah, Aged about 65 years, Chairman, Sneha Sangama Souhard Pattin Sahakari Ld., Tumakur R/a Opp. Baby Milk Diary, Chickpet, TUMKUR-
572 101, K.S. MANJUANTH, S/o. Shivakumar, Manager, Sneha Sangama Souhard Pattin Sahakari Ld., Tumakur. R/a Uajamanara Street Chickpet, Tumur-572 102 (2nd Petitioner/Accused No.5) and D.N.Parshvanath, S/o Late Nemiraj Aged 60 years, R/o No.82, Ground Floor, 8th Cross, Lower Palace Orchards Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru-560003 (Respondent No.1/Complainant) today at Bengaluru, do hereby solemnly affirm on oath as under;
1. It is submitted that we B.s.Manjunath and K.S. Manjunath are the 1st and 2nd Petitioners and I, D.N.Parshvanath 1st Respondent in the above Petition. We know the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, we are competent to swear this affidavit. It is submitted that we B.S.Manjunath and K.S.Manjunath have filed above Petition by seeking to quash the Complaint and FIR in Sadashiva Nagar Police Station Crime No.123/2018 pending on the files of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and to quash all the proceedings thereon.
2. It is submitted that Accused No.1, K.S.Shanmukhan, Accused No.2, Shyla K.S and Accused No.3 Deepashree S had filed a Petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the Complaint and F.I.R. filed by D.N.Parsvanath i.e. 1st Respondent herein, in Criminal Petition No.6979/2018.
3. It is submitted that above said Criminal Petition No.6979/2018 ended in compromise between the Accused No.1, K.S.Shanmukham, Accused No.2, Shyla K.S and Accused No.3 Deepashree S on the hand and D.N.Parsvanath i.e 1st Respondent herein on the other. By an order dated 01.02.2019 this Hon’ble Court was pleased to quash the Complaint, FIR and all proceedings in Sadashiva Nagar Police Station Crime No.123/2018. In the said Compromise I, D.N. Parsavanath, have acknowledged receipt of entire settlement amount of Rs.85,00,000/- (Rupees Eighty Five Lakhs only) from the Accused No.1 to 3 and also have withdrawn the civil suit in O.S.No.120/2017 filed by me against the Accused No.1 to 3 on the file of Hon’ble Prl.Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Gubbi.
4. I, D.N. Parsvanath state that 1st Petitioners B.S.Manjunath and 2nd Petitioners K.S.Manjunath are not parties to the Agreement of Sale in question. Hence I to not wish to prosecute the Complaint filed against the 1st Petitioner B.S.Manjunath and 2nd Petitioners K.S.Manjunath.
WHEREFORE, we most respectfully pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased quash the Complaint, FIR and all proceedings in Sadashiva Nagar Police Station Crime No.123/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 423, 207, 418, 419, 406, 417, 415, 416, 419, 420 and 423 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending on the files of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru and by acquitting B.S.Manjunath and K.S.Manjunath, 1st and 2nd Petitioners herein, in the interest of justice.
We do hereby state on solemn affirmation that what is stated above is true and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief.”
7. A careful perusal of the complaint does not disclose any offence against petitioners. As per the complaint averments, complainant availed loan from the bank of which petitioners are the Chairman and Manager respectively.
8. It is settled that initiation of criminal proceedings against innocent citizen is a serious matter. It is averred in the complaint that loan was sanctioned in the complainant’s name and sum of Rs.52,00,000/- was transferred into the account of accused No.1. Thus, the relation between complainant and petitioners is that of a banker and a constituent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, initiation of criminal proceedings against petitioners amounts to abuse of process of law. Admittedly, complainant has settled the matter amicably with accused No.1 to 3. By filing the joint affidavit extracted supra, it is prayed on behalf of the parties to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. No useful purpose would be served by continuing criminal proceedings against petitioners. However, in view of what is recorded hereinabove, it would be appropriate to allow this petition by imposing costs on the complainant for initiating proceedings against bank officials.
9. Accordingly all proceedings in Crime No.123/2018 on the file of IV Addl. CMM, Bengaluru, are quashed subject to respondent No.1-complainant depositing cost of Rs.10,000/- before this Court by way of demand draft in the name of Registrar General. The petition stands disposed of.
10. In view of disposal of this petition, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration and the same is also disposed of.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE Yn.