Allowed

Haji Suleman v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Sept 2021CRL.P/5203/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka quashed criminal proceedings against the petitioner under various IPC sections. The court relied on a joint settlement memorandum filed by the petitioner and the second respondent, which mutually cancelled differences and waived further prosecution.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in C.C. No.1933/2016 (Crime No.319/2014) pending before III Addl Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga are quashed.

Haji Suleman Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5203/2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

HAJI SULEMAN S/O HABIB DADA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT SONA AGENCY, O.T. ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA - 577201.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. MAHESH.S., ADVOCATE-PH)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TUNGANAGARA POLICE STATION, SHIVAMOGGA - 577201 REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 01.

¶13

SMT. NUZAHAT K. FAHIM W/O KHAJA FAHINUDDIN AHMED, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO B - 230, GHATAPRABHA BLOCK, NATIONAL GAMES HOUSING COMPLEX, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560047.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., HCGP FOR R1-PH; SRI. M.H.HIDAYATHULLA, ADVOCATE FOR R2-VC)

¶16

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SHIVAMOGGA IN C.C.NO.1933/2016(CRIME NO.319/2014 OF TUNGARANAGARA POLICE STATION).

¶18

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

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Heard Sri Mahesh S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Namitha Mahesh B.G., H.C.G.P. for respondent No.1 and Sri M.H. Hidayathulla, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.

¶21

The parties to the lis have arrived at

¶22

settlement and have placed a joint memorandum for settlement which reads as follows :

¶23

"That the Petitioner and the 2^nd Respondent humbly submit as follows:

¶24

It is submitted that based on complaint lodged by the 2^nd Respondent, 1st respondent police had initiated criminal proceedings against the Petitioner arraigning him as accused no 3 before Hon'ble III Addl Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga in C.C. No.1933/2016 (Crime No. 319/2014) for offences

¶25

¶26

under Section 420, 447, 323, 409, 465, 506 R/w Sec. 34 IPC.

¶27

It is submitted that the petitioner and 2^nd respondent have sorted out their differences leading to initiation of criminal case that is C.C. No.1933/2016 (Crime No. 319/2014) for offences under Section 420, 447, 323, 409, 465, 506 R/w Sec. 34 IPC. The petitioner affirms that he has no claim whatsoever against the 2^nd respondent herein. Hence, in view of the aforesaid understanding the 2^nd Respondent does not intend to further prosecute the Petitioner.

¶28

Under the above circumstances, this joint memorandum of settlement between Petitioner and the 2nd Respondent may be considered and proceedings against the petitioner herein in C.C. No.1933/2016 (Crime No. 319/2014) for offences under Section 420, 447, 323, 409, 465, 506 R/w Sec. 34 IPC Indian Penal Code initiated by the 1^st respondent police pending on the file of the Hon'ble Hon'ble III Addl Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga may be quashed in the interest of justice in view of the compromise between the parties.

¶29

Sd/Sd/PETITIONER 2^ND RESPONDENT

¶30

Sd/Sd/ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2

¶31

¶32

The proceedings pending before III Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Shivamogga in C.C. No.1933/2016 (Crime No.319/2014 of Tunga nagara Police Station) stands quashed, in the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

hnm

Haji Suleman v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haji Suleman 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

Ramesh D K Vs State of Karnataka

N Radha Krishna Vs the Commissioner

Sri G Ravi Vs State of Karnataka

S.K.Badami Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Hariraj Shetty Vs the State by Its Home Secretary

Miss. Paramjeet Kaur Vs the State of Karnataka