Petitioner sought quashing of proceedings under Section 482 CrPC alleging absence from the place of incident. Court dismissed petition, noting factual dispute regarding phone records requires trial court adjudication.
Petition dismissed with liberty to file application for discharge based on call records.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl..P.No.3648 of 2019
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3648 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
SANDEEP GUPTA, S/O LATE ARUN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.90/75, SOMPURA GATE, B.HOSAHALLI ROAD, SARJAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU – 562 106.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI.M.V.VEDACHALA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Crl..P.No.3648 of 2019
2
SARAJAPURA, BENGALURU – 562 125.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1067/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL/ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CR.NO.208/2014 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 447, 506 OF IPC PURSUANT TO THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 05.11.2014.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Crl..P.No.3648 of 2019
3
mother-in-law and one another have colluded and created bogus documents in respect of properties situated in Sy.No.7/1, 30/1 and 31/1 at Sompura Village, Sarjapura Taluk belonging to respondent No.2 and they were forcing respondent No.2 to execute certain documents. It is alleged that in regard thereto earlier proceedings in Crime No.208/2014, have initiated against his father-in-law and mother-in-law where they were on anticipatory bail. It is alleged that his father-in-law has threatened respondent No.2 with dire consequences including death if he does not sign the documents. The petitioner being aggrieved by the proceedings initiated against him had filed Criminal Petition No.1064/2015 before this Court to quash the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioner and this Court by order dated 18.03.2019 has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner. On account of the same, a complaint came to be laid as regards which the FIR in Crime No. 1067/2016 was registered on 07.11.2014 on the file of Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC,
Crl..P.No.3648 of 2019
4
Anekal. On investigation, the charge sheet came to be laid even against the petitioner herein.
petitioner would submit that the petitioner was not within the Country at the time of said incident and therefore, the allegations made against the petitioner is not sustainable and proceedings are required to be quashed. He further submits that he is not involved in the alleged offence and therefore, the petitioner was unnecessarily dragged into the matter only to pressurize him and his father-in-law for no reason.
Crl..P.No.3648 of 2019
5
Sd/-
JUDGE
SSD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's presence was implicated in the offence, given the dispute over phone call records linking him to the incident.
SANDEEP GUPTA
STATE OF KARNATAKA
SRI.MANU ITTINA
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
