IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.51591/2019 (GM RES) BETWEEN SRI M MUNISWAMY S/O KEMPAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/A SRINIDHI LAYOUT ST. MARKS SCHOOL ROAD, WELFARE ASSOCIATION BENGALURU-560076.
(BY SRI MOHANKUMARA D, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEVANAHALLI POLICE STATION DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-560243 REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDINGS HIGH COURT, BENGALURU-560001 2. K GANGADHARAN RAJU S/O LATE K VENKATA RAJU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/A NO.14, FLAT NO.50 SKANDA MANSION 5TH MAIN ROAD, NAVODAYANAGAR J P NAGAR, 7TH PHASE BENGALURU-560076.
(BY SRI K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R-1.) ...PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CRPC, PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.821/2019 ANNEXURE-C FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 466,471,474,420,120(b) R/W 34 OF IPC PENDING IN THE FILE OF ACJ AND JMFC AT DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Govt. Pleader.
2. The petitioner is before this court being aggrieved by the charge sheet filed against him in C.C. No.821/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 and 120(B) of the IPC.
3. One Gangadhar Raju.K lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional court complaining of offences punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act against the instant petitioner.
4. The petitioner in response lodged an other Private Complaint registered as PCR No.12543/2015 alleging that the cheque was issued to one Siddaraju and the said Siddaraju has misplaced the cheque along with the bag containing other documents and that the petitioner had not borrowed any such loan or any amounts from the complainant i.e. the second respondent herein and in support of his contention, the petitioner is said to have produced a complaint alleged to have been lodged by the Siddaraju to the jurisdictional police intimating the police about the loss of the bag and signed cheques kept therein.
5. The second respondent suspecting foul play has lodged a complaint with the Devanahalli police station which came to be registered as Crime No.0053/2016 on 11.07.2016. The respondent police after investigation have also laid a charge sheet charging the petitioner and the said Siddaraju guilty of the offences punishable under Sections, 465, 468, 471, 420 and 120(B) of the IPC.
6. It is the case of the petitioner that the said Siddaraju who is arrayed as Accused No.2 has appeared as a witness in the complaint lodged by the second respondent under the provisions of Section 138 of N.I. Act and that he has tendered evidence to the effect that the complaint has indeed been lodged by him and that the complaint has being received and endorsement has been issued by the jurisdictional police.
7. In the light of this evidence, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that nothing survives in the complaint registered against the petitioner and the said Siddaraju by the first respondent police. Whether the statements constitute a defence and absolves the petitioner is a matter in the domain of appreciation of the evidence and in that background and the fact obtaining in the case and other attending circumstances which implies an appreciation of factual aspects of the case, the factual matrix of the case and defence of the accused cannot be a ground enabling this court to exercise the inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings.
Accordingly, the petition being devoid of merits stands rejected.
Chs* CT-HR Sd/- JUDGE