IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7451 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
SRI SRIDHAR KAMAT S/O V.K.KAMAT, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, JEWEL ROCK HOTEL, BM.ROAD, HASSAN-573201 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI: MAHESH S, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HASSAN EXTENSION POLICE STATION, HASSAN-573201 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001 2. SMT. PARIMALA S MUDDI W/O PHANIRAJ AAKRUTHI ENGINEERS AND INTERIOR DESIGNERS, 8/4, 2ND FLOOR, NEW TIMBER YARD LAYOUT, MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE-560026 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; R2-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23.08.2016 PASSED BY THE III ADDL. S.J., HASSAN IN CRL.RP.204/2014 CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2014 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HASSAN IN C.C.NO.587/2010 AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND TO DISCHARGE HIM FROM THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS.
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 charge sheet filed against him in C.C.No.587/2010 for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 is duly served and unrepresented. Perused the records.
3. The substance of the accusation made against the petitioner herein is that, at the instance of the petitioner herein, respondent No.2-complainant attended to the interior works of the “Hotel Jewel Rock”, Hassan belonging to the petitioner herein, of the total value of Rs.85,10,918/-. But after completion of work, the petitioner herein paid only a part sum of Rs.45,00,000/- and the balance amount of Rs.45,10,918/- was not paid to the complainant and thereby, the petitioner has committed the above offences.
4. The allegations made in the complaint even if accepted on its face value would indicate that the dispute between parties is purely civil in nature. Respondent No.2 has converted the civil dispute into a criminal offence and has made use of the criminal process to recover the amount said to have been due to her. The said allegations even if accepted uncontroverted do not make out either the ingredients of Section 406 or 420 of Indian Penal Code. There are neither any allegations nor material in support of the fact that the petitioner herein got the work executed through respondent No.2 with intention to cheat or dupe her. On the other hand, claim of the respondent No.2 is that in respect of the interior work carried out by her, a sum of Rs.45,10,918/- is due to her. The entire charge sheet does not disclose the fraudulent intention or cheating on the part of the petitioner. As such, no case is made out for prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offences. Consequently, the proceedings initiated against the petitioner being ulteriorly motivated to recover the unpaid dues, continuance of the proceedings would turn out to be an abuse of process of Court. Hence, to secure the ends of justice impugned proceedings deserve to be quashed.
5. Accordingly, petition is allowed. Proceedings in C.C.No.587/2010 pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Hassan are quashed.
bkp Sd/- JUDGE