IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4611/2016 CONNECTED WITH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7110/2015 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8541/2016 Crl. P. NO.4611/2016 : BETWEEN 1. SRI MAYURESH KARLEKAR S/O MR ASHOK KARLEKAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS AUTHORITY SIGNATORY AND GENERAL MANAGER(FINANCE) GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LTD., GOLDEN HOUSE, NO.820 80 FEET ROAD, 8TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA BENGALURU -560 095 2. SRI PRATAP K AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LTD., GOLDNE HOUSE, NO.820 80 FEET ROAD, 8TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095 3. SRI ANJI (FULL NAME IS ANJIAH) AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS EXECUTIVE GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LTD GOLDEN HOUSE, NO.820 80 FEET ROAD, 8TH BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095.
... PETITIONERS.
(By SRI. ALWIN SEBASTIAN A/w. MS. RENY SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATES) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION BANGALORE CITY-560 051.
2. SRI S PRADEEP KUMAR S/O LATE V SATYAPRAKASH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/A NO.174/18 SURYA 13TH CROSS GIRINAGAR 3RD PHASE BANGALORE-560085 AND ALSO THE PROPRIETOR OF UNITED LAND BANK HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.S-415 SOUTH WING, MANIPAL CENTRE DICKENSON ROAD BANGALORE-560 042.
... RESPONDENTS.
(By SRI. I.S. PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II FOR R1, SRI. C.V. NAGESH, SENIOR COUNSEL A/w.
SRI. C. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.90/2016 OF SHIVAJI NAGAR P.S., ARISING OUT OF PCR NO.53728/2016 ON THE FILE OF XI A.C.M.M., BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 120(B),341,342,384, 386,406,420 AND 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
Crl. P. NO. 7110/2015 :
BETWEEN 1. MR S PRADEEP KUMAR AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O LATE V.SATYAPRAKASH, R/AT NO.174/18, SURYA 13TH CROSS, GIRINAGAR 3RD PHASE, BANGALORE-560 085.
AND ALSO THE PROPRIETOR OF UNITED LAND BANK, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.S-415, SOUTH WING, MANIPAL CENTRE, DICKENSON ROAD, BANGALORE-560 042.
2. MISS DIVYA H M AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, D/O SRI.MUNIYANNA, R/AT NO.55/106, 22ND MAIN ROAD, AVALAHALLI, NEAR SGM PUBLIC SCHOOL, BANGALORE-560 026.
... PETITIONERS.
(BY SRI. C.V. NAGESH, SENIOR COUNSEL A/w. SRI. C. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION, BROADWAY ROAD, BANGALORE-560 051. REP.BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.
2. M/S GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.820, 8OFT.ROAD, 8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 085 REP. BY IS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, MR.MAYURESH KARLEKAR.
... RESPONDENTS.
(By SRI. I.S. PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II FOR R1, SRI. SANTOSH S. NAGARALE, ADV. FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN PCR NO.5937/2015 AND IN CR.NO.53/2015 ON THE FILE OF I-ACMM, BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURES-A,B,C AND C-1 RESPECTIVELY.
Crl. P. NO. 8541/2016 :
BETWEEN 1. NAYAZ AHMED AGED 34 YEARS POLICE SUB INSPECTOR SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION BROADWAY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560001 PRESENTLY WORKING AS SUB INSPECTOR IN D J HALLI POLICE STATION BENGALURU 2. K G PRASAD AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS SON OF GOVINDARAJU N P C NO 8724 SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION BROADWAY ROAD BENGALURU - 560001 PRESENTLY WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE - 6826 PULAKESHINAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU – 560 005 3. SYED SAMIULLA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS SON OF SYED BASHA P C NO 9135 SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION BROADWAY ROAD BENGALURU - 560001 PRESENTLY AS H C 6932, BHARATHINAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU.
... PETITIONERS.
(By SRI. ALWIN SEBASTIAN A/w. MS. RENY SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATES) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.
2. S PRADEEP KUMAR SON OF LATE V SATHYAPRAKASH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 174/18 13TH CROSS GIRINAGAR III PHASE BENGALURU - 560085 PROPRIETOR UNITED LAND BANK S- 415, SOUTH WING MANIPAL CENTER DICKENSON ROAD, BENGALURU – 560042.
... RESPONDENTS.
(By SRI. I.S. PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II FOR R1, SRI. C.V. NAGESH, SENIOR COUNSEL A/w.
SRI. C. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.10.2016 PASSED BY THE XLIII ACMM, BANGALORE IN PCR.NO.53728/2016.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Petitioners in Crl.P.No.4611/2016 have sought to quash the proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.90/2016 arising out of PCR No.53728/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 341, 342, 384, 386, 406, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
2. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.7110/2015 have sought to quash the proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.53/2015 arising out of PCR No.5937/2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 120B read with Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 66 of the IT Act. 2000.
3. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.8541/2016 have sought to quash the order dated 3.10.2016 passed by the XLIII Addl. CMM, Bengaluru, in PCR No.53728/2016.
4. Among the parties, Shri Mayuresh Karlekar, Shri Anji, Shri S. Pradeep Kumar and Shri Nayaz Ahmed are present. The parties have filed joint memos in respective petitions.
5. The joint memo filed in Crl.P.4611/2016, reads as under:
“1. The dispute between the parties to the petition is resolved amicably at the intervention of their common friends and well- wishers.
2. In order to maintain business goodwill and harmonious relationship, the parties agree to bury all their differences arising out of the contracts which they had entered into.
3. In terms of the settlement arrived at, each of the parties to the above petition, do not have any claim whatsoever against the other in relation to the Memorandum of Understandings, dated 15.03.2014 and 17.03.2014 as well as the Term Sheet dated 18.09.2013. The settlement arrived at between the parties to the above petition has also necessitated them to withdraw the cases that are filed against each other that are pending consideration before the trial Court.
4. What is challenged by the petitioners in the above petition is, The Order of reference passed by the Trial Magistrate on the complaint filed by the second respondent in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in him under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the consequential act of the first respondent – police in registering the Crime against the petitioners.
5. In view of the settlement arrived at, without going into the merits of the matter, the second respondent has absolutely no objection whatsoever to allow the above petition and set at naught the Order of reference, quash the First Information Report filed pursuant to the Order of reference and the complaint of the second respondent be ordered to be dismissed. Therefore, the parties to the above named, humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to record this Memo, allow the above Petition, set at naught the Order which is impugned in the above Criminal Petition, quash the First Information Report filed pursuant to the Order of reference and dismiss the complaint of the second respondent Institution / Company, filed before the Trial Magistrate, getting itself represented through its authorized representative / signatory, in the ends of justice.”
6. The joint memo filed in Crl.P.7110/2015, reads as under:
“1. The dispute between the parties to the petition is resolved amicably at the intervention of their common friends and well- wishers.
2. In order to maintain business goodwill and harmonious relationship, the parties agree to bury all their differences arising out of the contracts which they had entered into.
3. In terms of the settlement arrived at, each of the parties to the above petition, do not have any claim whatsoever against the other in relation to the Memorandum of Understandings, dated 15.03.2014 and 17.03.2014 as well as the Term Sheet dated 18.09.2013. The settlement arrived at between the parties to the above petition has also necessitated them to withdraw the cases that are filed against each other that are pending consideration before the trial Court.
4. What is challenged by the petitioners in the above petition is, The Order of reference passed by the Trial Magistrate on the complaint filed by the respondent Institution / Company getting itself represented through its authorized representative / signatory in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in him under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the consequential act of the first respondent – police in registering the Crime against the petitioners.
5. In view of the settlement arrived at, without going into the merits of the matter, the second respondent has absolutely no objection whatsoever to allow the above petition and set at naught the Order of reference, quash the First Information Report filed pursuant to the Order of reference and the complaint of the second respondent be ordered to be dismissed. Therefore, the parties to the above named, humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to record this Memo, allow the above Petition, set at naught the Order which is impugned in the above Criminal Petition, quash the First Information Report filed pursuant to the Order of reference and dismiss the complaint of the second respondent Institution / Company, filed before the Trial Magistrate, getting itself represented through its authorized representative / signatory, in the ends of justice.”
7. The joint memo filed in Crl.P.8541/2016 reads as under:
“1. The dispute between the parties to the petition is resolved amicably at the intervention of their common friends and well- wishers.
2. In order to maintain good harmonious relationship, the parties agree to bury all their differences arising out of the Order of reference passed by the trial Magistrate.
3. The settlement arrived at between the parties to the above petition has necessitated them to withdraw the cases that are filed against each other that are pending consideration before the trial Court.
4. What is challenged by the petitioners in the above petition is, The Order of reference passed by the Trial Magistrate on the complaint filed by the second respondent in exercise of the jurisdiction vested in him under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the consequential act of the first respondent – police in registering the Crime against the petitioners.
In view of the settlement arrived at, without going into the merits of the matter, the second respondent has absolutely no objection whatsoever to allow the petition and set at naught the Order of reference, quash the First Information Report filed pursuant to the Order of reference and the complaint of the second respondent be ordered to be dismissed.
Therefore, the parties to the above named, humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to record this Memo, allow the above Petition, set at naught the Order which is impugned in the above Criminal Petition, quash the First Information Report filed pursuant to the Order of reference and dismiss the complaint of the second respondent Institution / Company, filed before the Trial Magistrate, getting itself represented through its authorized representative / signatory, in the ends of justice.”
8. The dispute between the parties had arisen out of two Memorandum of Understandings and Term sheet executed between Golden Gate Properties Limited and United Land Bank represented by Shri S. Pradeep Kumar. Arbitration also was initiated at the instance of Golden Gate Properties Ltd. There are allegations that in connection with this dispute, certain cheques were got up under duress and hence, the police officials against whom the said allegations were levelled are also made parties to the complaint in PCR No.53728/2016.
9. Presently, the parties have resolved their disputes interse and have arrived at a mutual settlement as reflected in the joint memos submitted by the parties. The joint memos are signed by Shri Mayuresh Karlekar representing Golden Gate Properties Ltd. and Shri S. Pradeep Kumar representing United Land Bank and their respective counsels.
10. Since the dispute between the parties has arisen out of the Memorandum of understandings and the Term sheet, the learned SPP has no objection to accept the joint memos filed by the respective parties, as the same do not offend any provisions of law. The aforesaid parties are present before court and submit that the terms of the joint memo are true and voluntary and they have withdrawn the allegations made against each other and request this Court to quash the proceedings initiated against the respective petitioners in terms of the joint memos filed in each of the petitions.
11. The submissions of the parties are taken on record. The joint memos are accepted. Petitions are disposed of in terms of the said joint memos. Accordingly, i) the proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Crime No.90/2016 arising out of PCR No.53728/2016 are hereby quashed;
ii) the proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Crime No.53/2015 arising out of PCR No.5937/2015 are hereby quashed ; and iii) the order dated 3.10.2016 passed by the XLIII Addl. CMM, Bengaluru, in PCR No.53728/2016 is hereby quashed.
In view of the above order, I.A.No.2/2016 in Crl.P.No.4611/2016 and I.A.Nos.1/2016, 2/2015, 2/2016 and 1/2019 in Crl.P.No.7110/2015 are dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE KS