IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA CRL.P. NO.2931/2017 BETWEEN 1. JAYAMMA, W/O J.D.SOMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT HEBBASALE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SAKLESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN – 573 134 2. HEMANTH KUMAR, S/O LATE J.D.SOMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT HEBBASALE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SAKLESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN - 573 134 3. VASANTH KUMAR, S/O LATE J.D.SOMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT HEBBASALE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SAKLESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN – 573 134 4. RENUKA, S/O B. RAJASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, YADAVARAHALLI, SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN – 573 134 ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. HEMANTH KUMAR D. ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SAKALESHPURA POLICE SAKALESHPURA, HASSAN DIST 573 134 2. K. G. UTTAPPA, S/O LATE GANAPATHI, R/AT HEBBASALE VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, SAKALESHPURA TALUK, HASSAN-573 134 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SPP-II FOR R-1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.124/2016 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., SAKALESHPURA.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION A/W I.A.NO.1/2017 THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners have sought for quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C. No.124/2016 (Crime No. 8/2015 of Sakaleshpura Police) registered against them for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 354, 323, 324, 504, 506, 447, 448 r/w. 34 of IPC, pending on the file Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Sakaleshpura.
2. As could be seen from the charge sheet papers in C.C. No. 124 /2016 it appears two complaints have been lodged by two groups. Whether they are case and counter case and whether the contents of the said complaints are true or false has to be ascertained either at the time of framing of charges or at the time of evidence. The learned counsel tried to persuade this court on the basis of some contradictions and omissions in the statements made by the witnesses in two cases. But that cannot be countenanced and appreciated at this juncture.
3. In the above circumstances, there are no sufficient grounds to admit the petition. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to move the trial Court for their discharge, if advised, by making necessary application. If any such application is filed, the trial court shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties on both sides and dispose of the same in accordance with law.
In view of dismissal of this case, the application-IA No.1/2017 filed for stay, does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, the said application stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGR*