IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR Crl.P.No.5304/2018 BETWEEN:
MR SYED TABREZ PASHA BAGDHADHI S/O SYED SHABEER PASHA BAGDHADHI, R/O NO.12/13, VIGNEESH RESIDENCY, FLAT NO.302, 2ND CROSS, SHANTHIVANAM, SANJIVININAGAR, BENGALURU-560 092.
(By Sri. BHARATH KUMAR V, ADV ) ... PETITIONER AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KODIGEHALLI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560 092 REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. SYEDA SIMRAN BAGADADI @ UMEYA ADIBA R/O NO.171, 9TH CROSS, WILLIAM TOWN, BENGALURUE-560 046.
... RESPONDENTS (By Sri. S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND INFORMATION DATED 11.11.2013, PREFERRED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, POLICE AS FIR NO.314/2013, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 498A,323,504,506 R/W 34, WHEREIN THE PETITIONER HEREIN IS ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.1 (ANNEXURE A AND A1) AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This petition has been filed for quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.314/2013 (C.C.No.12969/2014) registered against petitioner/accused No.1 for the offences punishable under section 498A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w section 34 of IPC which is pending on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
2. When matter was listed for admission on 28.03.2019, a joint affidavit came to be filed for quashing of the proceedings. Same was placed on record and following order came to be passed:
“2. Today, a joint affidavit has been filed by both parties whereunder petitioner and second respondent have stated to the following effect:
“(a) We state that, the present petition was filed by the petitioner i.e., Mr. Syed Tabrez Pasha Bagdhadhi, seeking quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.315/2013, currently renumbered as matter bearing C.C.No.12969/2014, pending on the file of the Hon’ble Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
(b) We state that, due to the intervention of the counsel on record and well wishers, we have now resolved our issues and are willing to compromise the existing Lit.
(c) We state that, in furtherance to such compromise, we had filed a Joint Memo before the HON’BLE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, TRAFFIC COURT – IV, BENGALURU, in matter bearing Criminal Misc. No.254/2013.
(d) We state that, one such terms of such Joint Memo was that, the respondent herein i.e., Syeda Simran @ Umeya Adiba was to express no objection to the allowing of the present petition and consequently quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.315/2013, currently renumbered as matter bearing C.C.No.12969/2014, pending in the file of the Hon’ble Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
(e) The respondent No.2 herein states that, in view of the compromise entered into between the petitioner i.e. Mr.Syed Tabrez Pasha Bagdhadhi and the respondent No.2 i.e. Syeda Simran @ Umeya Adiba, the latter gives no objection to the allowing of the present petition.
(f) We state that, the present affidavit is being filed with free will and without any coercion.”
3. Sri.Bharath Kumar.V, learned counsel appearing for petitioner has produced a copy of Joint affidavit whereunder parties have settled their entire dispute as per the terms set out thereunder. Said joint affidavit appended is placed on record.
4. Parties are present before Court. Petitioner has identified second respondent. To establish the identity of second respondent, no material is placed and as such this Court would not be inclined to entertain this joint affidavit. At this juncture, second respondent submits that she would file a memo enclosing photocopy of Aadhar Card issued by statutory authority. Her submission is placed on record. It is made clear that if same is not filed, this order accepting the joint affidavit would not come into effect.”
3. As noticed herein above, since there was a doubt expressed with regard to identity of 2nd respondent- complainant and she having agreed to file a memo enclosing photocopy of the Aadhar Card issued by the statutory Authority, this Court had placed her submission on record and had made it explicitly clear that order accepting joint affidavit would not come into effect till undertaking given to Court is complied by her. However, on the next day i.e., on 29.03.2019, 2nd respondent- complainant suo-motu had appeared before Court and submitted that she did not sign the joint affidavit voluntarily or in other words, she did not understood the contents of the joint affidavit and she was made to accept the same under duress. Placing her submission on record, following order came to be passed:
“At request of second respondent, re-list on 10/04/2019, since she submits that she had signed the joint affidavit by misrepresentation yesterday.”
Accordingly an affidavit came to be filed by 2nd respondent on 01.04.2019 by 2nd respondent whereunder she alleged that petitioner without disclosing what was happening in the case, she was asked to affix her signature on the papers and without understanding the things happening, she had affixed her signature to the joint affidavit on instructions of the petitioner. She had further alleged that after verifying the case from website she came to know that petitioner had mislead her and as such, she sought for rejecting the compromise petition. Hence, matter has been listed today.
4. During pre-lunch session, this Court passed the following order:
“Smt.H.Haleema Ameen, learned member of Bar who is present before the Court is requested to assist the Court since, respondent No.2-Smt.Syeda Simran Bagadadi @ Umeya Adiba who is present before the Court submits that she is not in a position to engage the counsel.
Call the matter at 2.30 p.m.”
5. Smt. H.Haleema Ameen, learned member of the Bar, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, has interacted with 2nd respondent-complainant and she submits that 2nd respondent-complainant has no objection for proceedings being quashed and the petitioner has tendered unconditional apology for her act of filing the affidavit dated 01.04.2019.
6. 2nd respondent-complainant, who is now present before Court and assisted by learned counsel Smt.H.Haleema Ameen, on enquiry made by the Court, would reiterate the contents of the affidavit filed today and submits that she has no objection for her affidavit dated 01.04.2019 being rejected as withdrawn and for such action she has expressed remorse, tendered unconditional apology and has sought for leniency be extended by condoning her acts. She has also stated that affidavit filed today (04.04.2019) is without any force, threat, coercion and it is out of her own will and volition and has prayed for accepting the same.
7. Learned counsel Smt.H.Haleema Ameen, who was requested to assist the Court, on repeated query to 2nd respondent, has also stated that on interacting with 2nd respondent , she is satisfied that 2nd respondent intends to withdraw her affidavit dated 01.04.2019 and she has also expressed her no objection for the proceedings pending against petitioner being quashed by accepting the joint affidavit filed on 28.03.2019.
8. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that affidavit filed today is placed on record and same deserves to be accepted. 2nd respondent-complainant has also annexed photocopy of the Aadhar Card issued by the statutory authority to establish her identity and same is placed on record.
9. Today, both parties have filed a joint memo whereunder petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- in two instalments of Rs.15,000/- each on or before 20.04.2020 and 20.04.2021 respectively.
It is also stated by the petitioner that he would perform marriage of his daughter born to 2nd respondent- complainant beholding his monetary status.
10. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, against petitioner in Crime No.314/2013 (C.C.No.12969/2014) registered for the offences punishable under section 498A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w section 34 of IPC is hereby quashed and petitioner is acquitted of the said offences.
(iii) This Court places on record its appreciation for the services rendered by Smt.H.Haleema Ameen, learned member of the Bar, who assisted the Court as Amicus Curiae and as such, HCLSC is directed to issue cheque in the name of Smt.H.Haleema Ameen, for a sum of Rs.3,500/-.
SD/- JUDGE TL