IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.691 OF 2014 BETWEEN:
SMT.VEENA N. W/O.CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT NO.26, 19TH MAIN ROAD J.C.NAGAR, KURUBARA HALLI BANGALORE-560 086 … PETITIONER (BY SRI CHETAN DESIA FOR SMT.RASHMI JADHAV, ADVOCATES) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MAHALAXMI LAYOUT POLICE REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE-560 001 2. SRI VENKATARAJ S/O.SRIKANTHACHARYA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT NO.142/143, 2ND FLOOR TAXPRO BUSINESS SOLUTION CO., BASAVANAGUDI BANGALORE-560 004 3. SRI NARASIMHA MURTHY S/O.C.S.RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.333 25TH CROSS, 15TH MAIN BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE BANGALORE-560 070 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI VISHNU HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI R.DWARESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.193/2012 OF MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT POLICE STATION, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE IN S.C.NO.1405/2013.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents. Perused the record.
2. Petitioner has sought to quash the chargesheet laid against her for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 395 and 120-B of IPC.
3. The main contention urged by the learned counsel for petitioner is that the petitioner herein was not named in the FIR. Petitioner herself was the complainant in Crime No.192/2012 and the proceedings are initiated against her as a counterblast to the complaint filed by her in Cr.No.192/2012.
4. I am unable to accept the above submission.
In the complaint, there are clear allegations that the complainants were called to Nandini Layout and when they went there, they were asked not to give evidence in Crime Nos.408/2011 and 72/2011 and when they did not budge, 5 to 6 persons attacked them and snatched gold ornaments and a cash of Rs.5,000/- from them.
5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner herein is one of the accused in Crime No.408/2011. Under the said circumstances, there is a prima facie material to show that the alleged incident has taken place at the instance of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the contention of the petitioner that the proceedings initiated against her is a counterblast, is contrary to the record and therefore, cannot be accepted. Since the material on record prima facie disclose the ingredients of the offences, I do not find any justifiable reason to quash the proceedings. Consequently, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE LB