IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1347 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
1. MALLIKARJUNA SON OF LATE.BADRAIAH AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS DOOR NO.2, 2ND CROSS VEERABADRA NILAYA OPP:SHRI VARASIDDIVINAYAKA SWAMY TEMPLE GOWRISHANKARA NAGARA OOTY ROAD MYSORE – 570 025 2. SMT. S.YASHODHA WIFE OF LATE MAHADEVA AGED 56 YEARS HOUSE NO.17, ‘A’ BLOCK 2ND CROSS, NACHENAHALLI PALYA J.P.NAGARA MYSORE – 570 025 3. BASAVARAJU SON OF LATE M.BASAPPA AGED 64 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.42, NACHENAHALLI PALYA MYSORE – 570 025 4. PUTTAMMA WIFE OF LATE SIDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.905/16, GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL ROAD VIDYARANYAPURA KHILLE MOHALLA MYSORE – 570 025 …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI HARISH GANAPATHY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDYARANYAPURA POLICE STATION MYSORE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE – 560 001 2. B.SHYLAJA WIFE OF DR.PANCHASHEELAN J.C. AGED 51 YEARS HOUSE NO.925 (G.F) 2ND MAIN, 56TH CROSS 4TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGARA BENGALURU – 560 010 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1; SHRI J.SATHISH KUMAR, FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO: A) QUASH THE FIR SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED IN CR.NO.118/2018 REGISTERED BEFOR THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDYARANAYPURAM POLICE STATION, MYSORE DISTRICT;
B) QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE SO FAR AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED ON THE FILE OF THE II- JMFC, MYSORE IN C.C.NO.97/2019 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 468, 420 R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Second respondent–B.Shylaja filed PCR No.157/2018 alleging that property bearing site No.5 measuring East to West 80 feet and North to South 50 feet situated at Nachanahalli, ‘A’ Block, Mysuru district was allotted to her mother Smt. Tripuramba on 25.01.1984 by Mysuru Urban Development Authority (for short ‘MUDA’).
2. Smt.Tripuramba, died on 16.04.1995. After the death of her mother, complainant made a request to MUDA to transfer the property in her favour. On 26.05.2004, the property was transferred into complainant’s name. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioners and three others based on some manipulated documents constructed a building in the site allotted to the complainant and have remained in possession thereof. Complainant initiated criminal proceedings against the petitioners/accused by filing the instant private complaint. Learned Magistrate referred the complaint for investigation by police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. After investigation, police have filed the charge sheet.
3. Shri Harish Ganapathy, learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that the complainant has filed O.S.No.1206/2016 seeking declaration and possession. After lapse of two years, she has filed the instant private complaint to arm twist the petitioners. He further submitted that, in substance it is alleged in the complaint that petitioners have illegally occupied the property in question and constructed a building. He argued that complainant has already initiated appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court seeking declaration and possession of the property. Therefore, the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners after lapse of two years is an after thought and amounts to abuse of process of law. Hence, he prayed for quashing the proceedings initiated against the petitioners by allowing this petition.
4. Shri J.Sathish Kumar, Learned advocate for respondent No.2/complainant in his usual fairness did not dispute the facts stated by the learned advocate for the petitioners. However, he argued that the petitioners have fabricated the documents that calls for prosecution of the petitioners.
5. I have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the records.
6. Undisputed facts of the case are, the petitioners have been alleged of having illegally taken possession of the property in question and constructed the building thereon. The complainant claiming to be the owner of the property has filed O.S.No.1206/2016 with a prayer for declaration and possession. To a query made by this Court, the learned advocate for the complainant stated that the documents relied upon by the complainant are filed in the Civil Suit. The veracity of the documents are subject matter in the inter-party civil suit. In the circumstances, parties having subjected themselves to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court and agitating the suit, private complaint filed by the complainant after lapse of two years amounts to abuse of process of law.
7. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. All proceedings in C.C.No.97/2019 (Cr.No.118/2018) pending on the file of JMFC (II Court), Mysuru are hereby quashed, so far as petitioners are concerned.
8. At this stage learned advocate for the petitioners prayed for an observation that findings recorded by this Court in this petition may not come in the way of adjudication of rights of the parties in the civil suit. It is to be noted that this petition is filed challenging the criminal proceedings against petitioners. The suit filed by the complainant is for declaration and possession. However, it is made clear that observations made in this petition do not come in the way of adjudication of the Civil Suit filed by the complainant / respondent No.2.
9. In view of disposal of this petition, I.A. No.1/19 does not survive of consideration and the same is also disposed of.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE HJ