IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7397/2016 BETWEEN:
1. Vinod Kumar, S/o Puttaswamy Aged about 26 years, Adarsha Nagar, Lingannapura Layout, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
2. Puttaswamy, S/o Puttaiah, Aged about 52 years, Adarsha Nagar, Lingannapura layout, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
3. Girijamma, W/o Puttaswamy, Aged about 45 years, Adarsha Nagar, Lingannapura Layout, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
4. Rahul, S/o Chandrashekar, Aged about 25 years, Adarsha Nagar, Lingannapura Layout, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
5. Mallesh, S/o Mahadeva, Aged about 27 years, Basaveshwara Nagar, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
6. Shivmurthy, S/o Mahadevaiah, Aged about 52 years, 1/410, Hosa Beedhi, Bheem Nagar, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
7. Ramesh @ Dumma Ramesh, S/o Shivmallu, Aged about 42 years, 1/234, Hosa Beedhi, Bheem Nagar, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
8. Mahadev, S/o Putta Maddaiah, Aged about 58 years, # 192, Hosa Beedhi, Bheem Nagar, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440.
9. Murthy, S/o Joharaiah, Aged about 44 years, #14/140, Mudigunda, Kollegala Town, Chamarajanagar-571 440 (By Sri. Abhilesh.J., Advocate) AND:
1. Sunil Gangadher, S/o Gangadher, Aged about 38 years, No.95, 1st Main Road, N.R.Layout, Vijinapura, Bengaluru-560 016.
2. State of Karnataka, By Rammurthy Nagar P.S. Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Bengaluru-01.
…Petitioners ...Respondents (By Sri.Bharath Kumar V., Advocate for R1; Sri.I.S.Pramod Chandra, SPP-II for R2) This Criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the FIR (Annexure-A) and the consequent proceedings in Cr.No.246/2016 pending before the X ACMM, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore for alleged offences P/U/S 363, 376, 34 of IPC.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioners have sought to quash the FIR- Annexure-A in Crime No.246/2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the victim had voluntarily eloped with petitioner No.1; allegations made against the petitioners do not constitute the offence either under Section 363 or Section 376 of IPC and therefore prosecution of the petitioner is bad in law.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 and learned SPP-II, however, dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and contend that the victim has implicated all the petitioners and the role played by them in the commission of the alleged offence is detailed by her in the complaint. Therefore, there is no reason to quash the proceedings.
4. On going though the complaint and the statement of the victim, it is noticed that the complainant has specifically alleged about the abduction of the victim with the assistance of other five accused. She also narrated the motive for the commission of the offence. All the petitioners are named in her statement. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the course of the arguments, has reiterated his stand that victim on her own accord had eloped with petitioner No.1 and a false case has been engineered to make the petitioners agree to the unlawful demands of the victim and her family, the victim was secured to the Court and was questioned in the open Court. Victim has stood by her statement given before the police and has reiterated that she has narrated the sequence of events and the role played by each of the petitioners in the commission of the alleged offence in her statement, recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.
In view of the above facts, no ground is available to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners.
Accordingly, petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE SB/-