IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6371 OF 2015 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5426 OF 2013 IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6371 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
SANJAY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 133 BLOCK NO. 27, POLICE LANE PANDESHWARA MANGALORE-575001.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI: P. KARUNAKAR, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA MANGALORE RURAL POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001.
2. HARISH K AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS S/O K GANESH RESIDING AT NO. 1/71/17 SHARADA KRIPA MAHADEVI NAGAR KARMAR, PADIL MANGALORE-575001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI: GIRIDHAR.H., ADVOCATE FOR R2-ABSENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CR.NO.186/2013 OF THE MANGALORE RURAL POLICE STATION, MANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 420 R/W 34 OF IPC AND FILE PENDING IN THE III JMFC, MANGALORE.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5426 OF 2013 BETWEEN:
SMT SRIKALA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS W/O SANJAY KUMAR R/AT D.NO.133, BLOCK NO.27, POLICE LANE, PANDESHWARA MANGALORE-575001.
(BY SRI: P. KARUNAKAR, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA MANGALORE RURAL POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001.
2. HARISH K AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS S/O K GANESH RESIDING AT NO. 1/71/17 SHARADA KRIPA MAHADEVI NAGAR KARMAR, PADIL MANGALORE-575001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI: GIRIDHAR.H., ADVOCATE FOR R2-ABSENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.186/2013 OF MANGALORE RURAL POLICE STATION, MANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 420 R/W 34 OF IPC AND PENDING BEFORE III JMFC COURT, MANGALORE.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R These two petitions are filed by accused Nos.1 and 2 against whom FIR is registered under sections 420 read with 34 of IPC.
Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned Addl. SPP for respondent No.1. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 is absent. Perused the records.
2. The allegations made in the complaint prima facie disclose ingredients of offence under section 420 IPC. In the complaint, it is specifically alleged that on the false representation and false assurance made by the petitioners, the complainant handed over a sum of Rs.13,20,000/- to the petitioners and during the transaction, he was issued with a receipt for a sum of 20,400/- US Dollars. The allegations made in the complaint require to be investigated and hence, it is not a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under section 428 Cr.P.C.
Consequently, petitions are dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss