Dismissed

Vijay Mohan Agarwal @ Vijay v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jun 2023CRL.P/2862/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition to quash the FIR. While noting the trial had proceeded for six years post-charge sheet and making the delay moot for quashing, the Court directed the trial court to conclude proceedings within six months by regulating procedure and ensuring party cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Per director to the trial court to conclude proceedings within six months.

Vijay Mohan Agarwal @ Vijay Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:20196 CRL.P No. 2862 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2862 OF 2023

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

VIJAY MOHAN AGARWAL @ VIJAY, S/O SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, NO.38, IST FLOOR, VIJAY BLOCK, LAXMI NAGAR, DELHI - 110 092.

¶6

MR. AMIT KUMAR JAIN @ AMIT JAIN, S/O JEEVAN KUMAR JAIN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT SHRI BUSINESS SOLUTIONS, NO-326, AO, NEHRU NAGAR, RAKESH MARG, GHAZIABAD, UTTAR PRADESH - 110 093.

¶7

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶8

(BY SMT. SHEETAL SONI, ADVOCATE)

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY CCB, ELECTRONIC CITY POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 100.

¶12

…RESPONDENT

¶13

(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)

¶14

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:20196 CRL.P No. 2862 of 2023

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO-752/2015 IN ELECTRONIC CITY POLICE STATION AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS THEREON INCLUDING CHARGE SHEET AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.24622/2017 ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE COURT OF 1ST ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Heard Smt. Sheetal Soni, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. Mahesh Shetty, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent and have perused the material available on the record.

¶19

The petitioners are before this Court seeking the

¶20

following prayers: "1. Call for record in CC NO.24622/2017 on the file of Hon'ble Court of 1^st Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶21

2. Quash the FIR in crime no-752/2015 in electronic city police station and entire proceedings thereon including Charge sheet and entire proceedings in CC NO.24622/2017 on the file of Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice."

¶22

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:20196 CRL.P No. 2862 of 2023

¶23

A crime comes to be registered against the petitioners on 28.10.2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 202, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, under Section 20(a) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1985 and under Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The allegation against the petitioners was usage of 21 SIM cards for conversion of international calls to local calls and causing loss to the State exchequer to the tune of Rs.34,12,50,000/-. The complaint becomes a crime in crime N0.752/2015 and the crime leads to investigation and the investigation to filing of a charge sheet in the year 2017 i.e. on 22.09.2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 202, 120(b) read with 34 of the IPC and Section 20(a) of the Indian Telegraph Act and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. In the light of the trial being proceeded through a large extent, there can be no warrant of interfere after six years of filing of the charge sheet.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶25

submits that the witnesses are not appearing before the concerned Court and matter is being adjourned from time to

¶26

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:20196 CRL.P No. 2862 of 2023

¶27

time, which has caused grave prejudice to the petitioners. The only relief that can be granted to the petitioners at this juncture is that the concerned Court shall endeavour to conclude the proceedings, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not earlier, as the issue is already eight years old and the charge sheet filed is six years ago.

¶28

To conclude the proceedings as observed

¶29

hereinabove, the concerned Court shall regulate its procedure.

¶30

It is needless to observe that the parties to the lis shall co-operate for conclusion of the proceedings as observed hereinabove.

¶31

Ordered accordingly.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

JY CT:PH

Vijay Mohan Agarwal @ Vijay v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Mohan Agarwal @ Vijay v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.R. Jagadishwara Vs the State Arasikere Town Police

C Hanumarangaiah Vs State by Madanayakanahalli Ps

Sheetalkumar Sudhakar Manere Vs State by

Smt Pushpavathi R Hegde Vs the State by

Sri. M Mariyappa Vs State of Karnataka by

Chandrashekarachari Vs the State of Karnataka