IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4574 OF 2013 BETWEEN:
Sri P.G.R.Narendrababu @ P.G.R.Naren, Son of P.G.Ramakrishnappa, Aged about 38 years, Residing at D.No.771/02, Opp : Police Quarters, P.B.Extension, Davanagere – 577 002. …Petitioner (By Sri Siddamallappa.P.M., Advocate) AND:
Dr.Sharanaiah, B.H.M., Son of Virupakshaiah, Medical Practitioner, Aged about 55 years, Residing at D.No.1254/2001, 8th Cross, 2nd Main, Vinobanagar, Davanagere – 577 002. ...Respondent (By Sri Revanna Bellary and Smt.N.V.Manjula, Advocates – Absent-) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the criminal prosecution initiated against the petitioner in criminal case registered in C.C.No.608/2013 (PCR No.213/2010) as per order dated 21.03.2013 pending on the file of the JMFC-I, Davanagere for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 379 of IPC.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner has sought to quash the order dated 21.03.2013 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class-I, Davanagere whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences under Sections 420 and 379 of IPC and issued summons to the petitioner to appear before the Court.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Counsel for the respondent is absent. Perused the records.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made against the petitioner are false and motivated. Earlier to the instant proceedings, respondent- complainant had filed a private complaint against the petitioner herein under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. Later, the complainant withdrew the said proceedings on the ground of compromise arrived at between the parties. In terms of the said compromise, part payment was also made. Under the said circumstances, the instant complaint is filed only to harass the petitioner to coerce him to pay the balance amount due to the complainant. Further he submits that even if any amount is due in terms of the compromise between the parties in the earlier proceedings, adequate remedy is available to the complainant to recover the said amount and hence the impugned proceedings being abuse of process of Court, the same are liable to be quashed.
4. On going through the averments made in the complaint, I find that the grievance of the complainant is that on 10.09.2010 at about 10.30 a.m., when the complainant requested the accused to pay the amount, accused refused to pay the same and he snatched the bag containing NGO files, medical equipments and medicines, stethoscope and cash of Rs.1500/- and ran away from the spot. These allegations prima facie attract the ingredients of Sections 379 and 420 of IPC. Further, the records disclose that in C.C.No.818/2008, the petitioner herein had agreed to pay the balance amount of Rs.40000/- to the complainant and since he failed to pay the said amount, the alleged incident appears to have taken place. Therefore, it cannot be said that the proceedings initiated against the petitioner are false and baseless. Since the averments made in the complaint and sworn statement make out the ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioner, I do not find any justifiable ground to quash the proceedings. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Prs*