IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.8745 OF 2018 BETWEEN:
Sri.Gali Hanumanthaiah S/o.T.Narasimhaiah Aged about 57 years Occ: Police Head Constable R/at No.194, 11th Cross, 4th Block, Peenya, Bengaluru.
(By Sri.Chandrashekar, Advocate) AND:
The State of Karnataka Represented by Bengaluru City Railway Police Represented by State Public Prosecutor High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001.
(By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP) …Petitioner …Respondent This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash the complaint dated 02.04.2017 initiated by the respondent police and to quash the FIR in Crime No.123/2017, dated 05.04.2017 before the Hon’ble Court of IV ACMM, at Bengaluru registered by the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 468 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Heard learned counsel Sri Chandrashekar, appearing for petitioner and Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for State. Perused the records.
2. Petitioner has sought for quashing of FIR registered in Crime No.123/2017 dated 05.04.2017 pending before IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Section 468 of IPC.
3. The gist of the prosecution case is, when complainant perused the log books produced before him on 01.04.2017 for inspection and verification, he found his signature has been forged in entry column of June, 2016 relating to Motorcycle bearing registration No.KA.03.G.746 and it is further alleged that his signature has been forged after applying whitener over the seal of the Department. Hence, contending that petitioner was not present on 01.04.2017 and he was elsewhere as noticed in the departmental enquiry and making a strenuous attempt to rely upon the proceedings of the departmental enquiry, learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that continuation of present proceedings against petitioner would not only be onerous but also abuse of process of law on the ground that allegation made against petitioner in the complaint is vexatious.
4. At the stage of consideration of the prayer for quashing of proceedings, this Court would not examine the probable defense that accused would set up during the course of trial. Under what circumstances and on what particular date log books was produced for inspection and other allied and related issues with regard to the presence of complainant and scrutiny of log books from him, which is said to have been forged would all be matter of trial. Hence, this Court finds it is not a good ground to entertain this petition. Hence, petition is dismissed.
In view of dismissal of the main petition, IA.No.1/2018 for stay does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, IA.No.1/2018 is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE ag