IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR CRL.P.NO.4737/2019 BETWEEN SRI. YUSUF SHARIFF S/O LATE DASTAGIRI SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT MILLERS TANK ROAD, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560052 BY ITS PROPRIETOR OF M/S.HILL LAND PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS.
(BY SRI D.N.NANJUNDAREDDY, SR. ADV. FOR SRI S.BALAKRISHNAN, ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION, NOW CCB(SE) BENGALURU REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560001 2. SRI K PRAVEEN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S REDDY PROJECTS AND DEVELOPERS(P) LTD., NO.133/1, THE RESIDENCY, ...PETITIONER 2ND FLOOR, RESIDENCY ROAD, BENGALURU-560025.
(BY SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1, SRI B.S.RADHANANDAN, ADV. FOR R2.) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.108/2019 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.406 AND 420 OF IPC, ON THE FILE OF THE ASHOKNAGAR POLICE STATION NOW CCB(SE) BENGALURU PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE IV ACMM AT BENGALURU PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri D.N.Nanjunda Reddy appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Counsel for respondent no.2 and the learned HCGP.
2. Petitioner is before this Court praying to quash the complaint in Crime No.108/2019 registered with the respondent-Police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 & 420 IPC.
3. The admitted facts are that the petitioner is the landlord and respondent no.2 is the builder and petitioner had executed a Joint Development Agreement (JDA) in favour of respondent no.2 and that on account of certain misgivings, petitioner cancelled the JDA resulting in respondent no.2 preferring the complaint alleging offences punishable under Sections 406 & 420 IPC.
4. Petitioner and respondent no.2 are present. A joint memo signed by the parties and the Counsels is filed. It is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue which arises out of a purely contractual relationship.
5. The Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH VS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANOTHER – (2012)10 SCC 303 has laid down certain guidelines. In the said ruling, the Apex Court in respect of matters which are compoundable under Section 320 Cr.PC, has been pleased to hold that even in instances of registration of offences which are not compoundable, the High Court is not devoid of authority to invoke its inherent jurisdiction and exercise its powers under Sections 482 Cr.PC to quash the complaint in the event the ingredients of the offences are not made out or where the ends of justice would be better served if the settlement arrived between the parties which are purely of civil in nature or where disputes have arisen on account of a commercial transaction and parties desire to give a quietus by arriving at an amicable settlement amongst themselves.
6. In the instant case, the law as laid down by the Apex Court is squarely applicable to the facts of the case. On a query, respondent no.2-complainant categorically expresses his desire to withdraw the allegations and the complaint. In that view of the matter, no meaningful purpose would be served by directing the parties to take the proceedings to its logical end. Hence, the joint memo is taken on record.
7. Accordingly, petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in Crime No.108/2019 registered with the respondent-Police stands quashed.
Sd/- JUDGE KK CT-HR