The High Court quashed criminal proceedings for forgery and cheating under Section 482 CrPC, holding that forensic evidence negated the charge of signature forgery and continued process was an abuse of law.
Impugned proceedings in C.C. No.78/2021 pending before Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Haveri are quashed.
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. 100613 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100613 OF 2022 (482)
BETWEEN:
SHRI. FAKKIRESH S/O VEERAPPA BALIGAR AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. 3RD CROSS, VIDYANAGAR, A BLOCK HAVERI-581110 TQ AND DIST. HAVERI
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
K M
SOMASHEKAR
Digitally signed by K M SOMASHEKAR Location: High court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad Date: 2022.11.25 11:53:08 -0800
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.S.KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1, SRI.SANTOSH MALLIGAWAD, ADV. FOR SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.78/2021 PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, HAVERI FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 420, 468, 201 OF IPC VIDE ANNEXURE-F.
CRL.P No. 100613 of 2022
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The Police, after investigation, submitted the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 201 of IPC. The summary of the charge sheet is that the petitioneraccused was working as a Manager of the de facto complainant Bank and on 22.04.2016 one Basavantappa S/o. Shivappa Hugar deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in his bank account and the petitioner by forging two signatures of the account holder, withdrew a sum of Rs.90,000/- on the Recurring Deposit Certificate (ªÀÄÄzÀÝvï oÉêÀt gÀ²Ã¢) on 30.04.2016. The learned Magistrate after accepting the charge sheet took cognizance for the aforesaid offences and issued summons. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.
CRL.P No. 100613 of 2022
coincide in writing habits of two different persons. Hence, he submits that in the absence of any corroborative material that the petitioner-accused has forged the signature of the account holder and withdrawn a sum of Rs.90,000/- from his bank account on the basis of general allegation is without any substance.
CRL.P No. 100613 of 2022
“In short, there is no divergent writing habits are observed between the questioned and specimen signatures marked as E1 to E4 and A1 to A4 except natural variations. The similarities in writing habits which observed in the questioned signatures marked as E1 to E4 with that of the specimen signatures marked as A1 to A4 are significant in nature and they will not accidentally coincide in writing habits of two different persons and when they are considered collectively, they are sufficient to express the positive authorship of questioned signatures marked as E1 to E4.”
signatures marked as E1 to E4 are significant in nature and they will not accidentally coincide writing habits of two different persons. In other words, the opinion indicates that the questioned and specimen signatures marked as E1 to E4 and A1 to A4 are by one and the same person i.e., is the account holder. In the absence of any material that the petitioner has forged the signature of the account holder and withdrawn a
CRL.P No. 100613 of 2022
sum of Rs.90,000/-, the charge sheet filed only on the basis of
a general allegation is without any substance.
ORDER
Criminal Petition is allowed.
The impugned proceedings in C.C. No.78/2021 pending
on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Haveri is hereby quashed.
SD/JUDGE
RSH
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 99
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings for forgery and cheating be quashed given the forensic report showing signatures match.
Whether continuation of prosecution amounts to abuse of process of law when probability of conviction is remote.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Fakkiresh
The State of Karnataka
Navakarnataka Souharda Credit Co-Operative Ltd.
Hemant Chandangoudar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
