Allowed

Nagaratna @ Paramma W/O Channappa Korishettar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC27 May 2019CRL.P/100099/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings initiated against petitioners accused persons. The Court held that proceedings should be quashed as no overt act was attributed to them and they stood on a similar footing to co-accused whose cases were previously quashed, avoiding prejudice.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C. No. 330/2012 against the petitioner-accused are quashed.

Nagaratna @ Paramma W/O Channappa Korishettar Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF MAY 2019

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A.PATIL

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100099/2017

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. NAGARATNA @ PARAMMA W/O. CHANNAPPA KORISHETTAR, AGE 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. BELAGAL, TQ. HANAGAL, DIST. HAVERI.

¶8

SMT. CHANNAVVA @ RATNAVVA W/O. GADIGEPPA WALISHETTAR, AGE 85 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. DUNDSI, TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI. M.B.GUNDAWADE, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA, STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARWAD, THROUGH BANKAPUR POLICE.

¶13

SHAMBULINGAPPA S/O. BASALINGAPPA MAMALEPATTANSHETTAR, AGE 38 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. BANKAPUR, TQ. SHIGGAON, DIST. HAVERI.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(SRI. RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP FOR R1;

¶16

: 2 :

¶17

R2 SERVED )

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF THE CASE ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT SHIGGAON IN CRIMINAL CASE NO.330 OF 2012 AND PASS AN ORDER QUASHING ALL THE PROCEEDINGS OF CRIMINAL CASE NO.330 OF 2012 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIGGAON FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 143, 147, 447, 323, 341, 109, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This petition has been filed by the Petitioners-

¶22

Accused Nos.9 & 11 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to quash the proceedings in CC No.330/2012 on the file of the Civil Judge & JMFC, Shiggaon for the alleged offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 447, 323, 341, 109, 504, 506 r/w. Section 149 of IPC.

¶23

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondentState.

¶24

: 3 :

¶25

The gist of the facts of the case are that the

¶26

marriage of Nirmala was performed with respondent No.2-Sri. Shambulingappa on 15.12.2003. They led happy marital life for some time and subsequently respondent No.2 during the life time of Nirmala, got married one Parvati on 24.09.2006. In order to bring the said Parvati to his house they started ill-treating and harassing Nirmala-first wife. On 03.05.2009. Nirmala met with an unnatural death due to burnt injuries. In this behalf a complaint was registered in Crime No.117/2009 and a B-report was filed. Subsequently, the said B-report was challenged by the Complainant in P.C.No.32/2011. That also came to be dismissed and subsequently he also filed another private complaint in P.C.No.26/2012.

¶27

It is the further case of the prosecution that though because of ill treatment and harassment caused to the Nirmala and set fire. With that grievance on 16.07.2012 at about 9 p.m. with the respondent No.2

¶28

: 4 :

¶29

and others were there in the RCC building, at that time the accused persons were entered and they tried to assault them and to set to fire and threatened with life. On the basis of a complaint a case has been registered.

¶30

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that, earlier the accused Nos.2, 3, 7, 10, 13 & 15 have approached this Court along with other accused persons in Criminal Petition No.11493/2012 to quash the proceedings. This Court by order dated 21.08.2013 has allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings as against accused Nos.2, 3, 7, 10 & 13, on the ground that there is no material as against the accused-petitioners. The present petitioner accused No.9 & 11 also stand on similar footing and as such they are also entitle to the same benefit. He further submitted that the entire records demonstrate that the woman folk of the petitioner family and relatives being brought on record frivolously without there being any material. There is no overt act alleged as

¶31

: 5 :

¶32

against the petitioner-accused. He further submitted that the only allegations which has been made as against the petitioner-accused is that they have also instigating the other accused persons for the commission of the said offence. It is also further submitted that the accused-petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and the same requires to be quashed. The taking of the cognizance by the Court below prima facie shows that the said order is capricious and abuse of process of law. On these grounds they prayed to allow the petition.

¶33

Per contra, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 argued and submitted that the petitioners are also involved in the said crime. There is ample material to show that they have also instigated and there is evidence in this behalf. He further submitted that whether the accused-petitioners have involved in the case or not is a matter that has to be appreciated and considered only at the time of Trial and

¶34

: 6 :

¶35

not at the premature time. He prays to dismiss the petition.

¶36

I have carefully heard the learned counsels

¶37

appearing for the parties and perused the petition papers and the records. It is not in dispute that accused Nos.2, 3, 7, 10 & 13 have approached this Court in Criminal Petition No.11493/2012 and this Court by order dated 21.08.2013 has allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings as against accused Nos.2, 3, 7, 10 & 13 and the said order has also not been challenged by the State before the Hon’ble Apex Court. Even as could be seen from the records the position of the accused Nos.9 & 11 is also similar to that of accused Nos.2, 3, 7, 10 & 13. Even as could been seen from the records the proceedings initiated against the women folk of the petitioner family and the relatives is clearly indicated the fact that they have been falsely implicated in this case. In the similar grounds this Court has quashed the proceedings against the other accused

¶38

: 7 :

¶39

persons. Even as could be seen from the records, no overt act have been attributed to the petitioner accused Nos.9 & 11.

¶40

In the facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the said fact has been already covered by the decision quoted supra if the proceedings are allowed to continue in these facts and circumstances, definitely that it is going to cause prejudice. Under the said facts and circumstances, the petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.330/2012 on the file of the Civil Judge & JMFC, Shiggaon for the offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 447, 323, 341, 109, 504, 506 read with 149 of IPC as against petitioner-accused Nos.9 & 11 are quashed.

¶41

*Svh/-

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

Nagaratna @ Paramma W/O Channappa Korishettar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagaratna @ Paramma W/O Channappa Korishettar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Karim Rehman Qureshi Vs State of Karnataka

Mr.Sunil S/O Shankrayya Sadashivpeth Vs Shri.Harunsab S/O Dawalsab Dhamanekar

Shri.Channappa S/O Fakeerappa Rathod Vs the Deputy Commissioner

M/S Indian Products Private Limited, Vs State of Karnataka

Shri.Mangesh Balakrishna Kekare Vs the State of Karnataka

B.Imran S/O B. Jameel Sab Vs the State of Karnataka