The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying to quash an FIR alleging forgery, cheating, and misappropriation. The court held that disputed factual issues require investigation and cannot be decided at this stage.
Petition to quash the FIR is dismissed; interlocutory applications disposed of accordingly.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3682 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
MANJUNATH V.S. S/O. SURESH V. AGED 37 YEARS KAVERI GRAMEENA BANK OLD MANAGER, HANGALA BRANCH HANGALA, GUNDLUPET TALUK CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571 439
NOW WORKING ADDRESS KAVERI GRAMEENA BANK R/O. D.NO.3254, 7TH MAIN 2ND CROSS, "G" BLOCK, KANAKADAS NAGAR MYSORE - 570 022.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI VIKAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
2
MANAGER HANGALA BRANCH HANGALA, GUNDLUPET TALUK CHAMRAJNAGAR - 570 022.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K. RAHUL RAI, HCGP FOR R.1; SRI B.H. SATISH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T.P. MUTHANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R.2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.420/2018 REGISTERED BY GUNDLUPETE POLICE STATION PENDING IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (Jr. Dn.) AND JMFC COURT, GUNDLUPET, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT, INITIATED AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 BASED ON THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 408, 409, 468 AND 471 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Aggrieved by the registration of FIR in Crime No.420/2018 by Gundlupet Police Station on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) & JMFC Court, Gundlupet, Chamarajnagar District, the petitioner herein who is arraigned as accused No.2 therein, has filed the instant petition.
3
customer of the Bank made a representation to the Bank stating that he has received a notice from the Bank to clear the loan, but he had already cleared the loan taken from the Bank and infact had got the release of the properties mortgaged. He further stated that he had paid the loan amount to the Manager of the Bank. A preliminary enquiry was conducted by the Bank and it was found on the face of it that there was misappropriation of funds and forgery of certain documents and hence, the Bank made a complaint to the Police regarding the same. Upon receipt of the complaint, the police suspecting the petitioner and two other persons have registered an FIR in Crime No.420/2018 wherein the accused are alleged of the offences under Sections 408, 409, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of IPC. The investigation is still under way. Whether the accused will be charged of the alleged offences or not, will be decided only upon investigation.
fact. The charge sheet is yet to be filed. This Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot
4
decide as to the disputed question of facts. Whether the petitioner is involved in the commission of the offences as alleged in the FIR will be known after investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. Under the circumstances, it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
In view of dismissal of the main petition, interlocutory applications, if any do not survive for consideration and the same are hereby disposed of.
SD/JUDGE
VMB
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash the FIR in a case involving disputed questions of fact.
Whether the petitioner alleged to have misappropriated funds and forged documents should have his prosecution quashed at the pre-charge stage.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manjunath V.S.
State of Karnataka
Ashwin A.
M.I. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
