IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.1907 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
1. VEERASWAMY REDDY S/O NARASAREDDY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS 2. PRASHANTH K.V.
S/O VEERASWAMY REDDY AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS BOTH ARE R/A NO 1112/3 FCI MAIN ROAD BEHIND H.P. GAS, KADUGODI BENGALURU-560 076 ... PETITIONERS (BY SHRI. B. LETHIF, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY H.D. KOTE POLICE H.D. KOTE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560 001 2. VIJAYA BANK A BODY CORPORATE, CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES [ACQUISITION & TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKING] ACT, 1980 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.41/2 MAHATHMA GANDHI ROAD BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER SRI. M.R.L. NARASIMHARAO AGE ABOUT 56 YEARS REGIONAL OFFICE NAZARABAD MOHALLA MYSURU-570 007 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.312/2016, ON THE FILE OF H.D KOTE P.S., H.D KOTE, MYSURU DISTRICT FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 420 R/W 34 OF IPC VIDE ANNEXURE-A PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR. DN.) AND J.M.F.C., H.D.KOTE, MYSURU DISTRICT.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Learned advocate for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the State jointly submit that this matter is covered by the decision of this Court dated 26.06.2018 in Crl.P.No.2556/2017 and connected petitions (Mahadeva R. Vs. State of Karnataka and another) and may be disposed of accordingly. Their submissions are placed on record.
2. This Court has dismissed Crl.P. No.2556/2017 with following order:
“11-Under the above said circumstance, it is too premature at this stage to quash the FIR itself. Hence, the petitions, in my opinion are devoid of merits and are liable to be dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court if any adverse report is submitted by the police without any basis and if any cognizance is taken against them by the Court.”
3. Accordingly, this petition is also dismissed with the above observations.
No cost.
Sd/- JUDGE Yn.