High Court of Karnataka quashed FIR against petitioner alleging theft of gold sold to Attica Gold. Court held petitioner ceased being Director before crime date per uncontroverted DIR-11 form, making FIR without substance.
Writ Petition allowed; Impugned FIR in Crime No.151/2018 quashed. Liberty reserved to State to proceed against company.
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 JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION No.8088/2020 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN :
P.S.AYUB @ BOMMNAHALLI BABU AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O MR.SYED BASHA R/AT T-3, MARIAMMA APARTMENTS FRAZER TOWN, BENGALURU – 560 005
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADVOCATE)
AND :
2
(BY SRI.ROHITH B.J., HCGP)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.15533/2019 (CRIME NO.151/2018) PENDING ON THE FILE OF V ACMM COURT BANGALORE AS PER ANNEXURE–H, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER HEREIN IS CONCERNED AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition, the first information report was lodged alleging that the gold jewelleries belonging to the complainant were stolen by the accused and the said accused sold the same to the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd in various branches.
3
No.151/2018 and after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner alleging that he is the Director of the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd and as such has committed an offence punishable under Sections 454, 380, 411 and 201 read with 34 of IPC. Taking exception to the same this petition is filed.
4
submitted against the petitioner does not warrant any interference and sought for dismissal of the petition.
5
be the Director of the company in question as on the date of the alleged incident. Hence, in the absence of any corroborative material that the petitioner as director of the company in question has received the stolen property, the registration of FIR and also the filing of charge sheet is without any substance.
ORDER
iii) Liberty is reserved with the respondent State to proceed against the company which is alleged to have received the stolen property in accordance with law, if so advised.
Sd/JUDGE
AKC
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Writ Petition under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC can be allowed to quash FIR when petitioner ceased to be company Director before alleged crime date.
Whether uncontroverted DIR-11 form indicating resignation negates need for corroborative material regarding petitioner's involvement in alleged theft.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P.S. AYUB @ BOMMNAHALLI BABU
STATE OF KARNATAKA
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL & INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE KARNATAKA
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
