IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1981/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI. KEDARNATH B. PATIL S/O LATE B.L. BASAVANAGOUD AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS # 440, 9TH MAIN, 6TH CROSS HBR LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE 2ND BLOCK, BANGALORE – 560 043.
(BY SRI. ASHOK PATIL., ADVOCATE) AND:
... PETITIONER 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HSR POLICE STATION BANGALORE, REP. BY APP.
2. SRI. B. RAJASHEKAR PATIL S/O LATE B.L. BASAVANAGOUDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/O 4011, ‘SOBHA DOFFODILS’ 24TH MAIN, II SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 102.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. GANESH N.I., ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.13815/2015 PENDING BEFORE THE VI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner who is arraigned as accused in C.C.No.13815/2015 and who is facing criminal prosecution for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406, 410, 411, 412, 418 and 420 of IPC registered by HSR Layout Police Station pending on the file of VI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, is before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
2. Second respondent and petitioner are uterine brothers. A private complaint came to be filed by second respondent on 04.07.2014 alleging that in respect of property belonging to family members petitioner-accused had created a General Power of Attorney and used the same against the interest of second respondent herein. On the basis of said complaint, learned Magistrate referred the matter to jurisdictional police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation, who initially registered the said complaint in Crime No.567/2014 and after completion of investigation charge sheet came to be filed in C.C.No.13815/2015 for the aforesaid offences.
3. Today learned Advocates appearing for parties have filed an application under Section 320(1) and (2) of Cr.P.C. for compounding the offences contending interalia that dispute between parties have been settled amongst all the family members in O.S.No.242/2011 and as such complainant is not interested in prosecuting the complaint lodged by him against petitioner. Both petitioner and complainant have filed a joint affidavit reiterating the contents urged in the said application.
4. Petitioner and second respondent- complainant are present before Court and they reiterate the contents of joint affidavit. Second respondent submits that out of his own free will and volition, without any threat, force or coercion he has affixed his signature to the joint affidavit as well as application and he also submits that he is not inclined to continue with the complaint lodged by him against petitioner. To establish the identities of parties present before Court, photocopies of identity cards issued by the statutory authority is produced along with a memo. Said memo is placed on record. In token of having identified the parties present before Court, learned Advocates have also affixed their signatures to the said application.
5. In the light of aforestated facts and keeping in mind the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of further proceedings against petitioner would not sub-serve the ends of justice and it would be an abuse of process of law. As such, this Court finds there is no impediment to grant the prayer sought for.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioner C.C.No.13815/2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 410, 411, 412, 418 and 420 of IPC by HSR Layout Police Station pending on the file of VI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, is quashed and petitioner is acquitted of aforesaid offences.
SD/-
JUDGE DR