Allowed

Sri Dhananjaygowda v. State by

Karnataka HC16 Nov 2023CRL.P/3238/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Sections 504, 324, and 506 of the IPC. The court found the FIR was lodged as a counter-blast with malice, relying on manipulated wound certificates and pending civil disputes between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 347/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 324 and 506 of IPC stand quashed.

Sri Dhananjaygowda Vs State by — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:40925 CRL.P No. 3238 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3238 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI DHANANJAYGOWDA S/O LATE BHAIREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT TONDAHALLY VILLAGE, BELLUR HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 432.

¶9

… PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRAKASHA K V., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

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

¶13

STATE BY BINDIGANAVILE POLICE -MANDYA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P. HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶14

SMT MAMATHA L W/O RUDRESH, AGED BY MAJOR, R/AT TONDAHALLI VILLAGE, BINDIGA NAVILE HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT -571 432.

¶15

… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKATSATYANARAYAN A., HCGP FOR R1; SRI K.L. SREENIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:40925 CRL.P No. 3238 of 2023

¶18

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.21/2022 (C.C.NO.347/2022) FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 504, 324, 506 OF IPC, BY BINDIGANAVILE POLICE PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE COURT OF CJ (SR.DVN.) AND JMFC COURT, NEGAMANGALA, MANDYA DISTRICT, AS SUCH TERMS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO IMPOSE, TO SECURE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC.

¶19

THIS CRL.P., COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Petitioner is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 324 and 506 of IPC.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that on 02.03.2022 at about 10.30 p.m., the accused abused and threatened the defacto complainant and assaulted C.W.2 on his head with stick and when C.W.2 caught hold of the stick and screamed for help, C.W.3 came to his rescue and at that time, the accused abused C.W.3 and threatened him and also assaulted him with stick.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR was lodged as a counter blast to the FIR lodged by the petitioner against the husband of defacto complainant. He further submits that the wound certificates are manipulated which clearly establish that the petitioner has been falsely implicated to circumvent the registration of complaint against the husband of 2^nd respondent - defacto complainant.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:40925 CRL.P No. 3238 of 2023

¶26

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned High Court Government Pleader for the State would submit that the charge sheet material discloses the commission of offence alleged against the petitioner and the veracity of the allegations can be considered at the time of trial and at this stage, the same cannot be gone into.

¶27

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

The petitioner had lodged a complaint against the husband of the defacto complainant in Crime No.20/2022 for the incident alleged to have taken place on 02.03.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 506, 323 and 34 of IPC. The impugned FIR was lodged on 07.03.2022 for the incident that has taken place on 02.03.2022 which clearly infers that the FIR was lodged to circumvent the FIR registered against the husband of defacto complainant.

¶29

Perusal of the wound certificates would indicate that the same are manipulated since there is difference in the date of incident and also the date of examination of C.Ws.2 and 3. It is also undisputed that the civil suits are pending between the parties in O.S.No. 340/2022 and O.S.No. 78/2023 with regard to certain immovable properties. Therefore, the FIR was lodged with malice and without probable cause to wreak vengence.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2023:KHC:40925 CRL.P No. 3238 of 2023

¶32

In view of the preceding analysis, continuation of the proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶35

(ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 347/2022 (Crime No. 21/2022 of Bindiganavile Police Station) for the offences punishable under Section 504, 324 and 506 of IPC pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nagamangala, Mandya District, stands quashed.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

Sri Dhananjaygowda v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Dhananjaygowda v. State by

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

Sri. Giriswamy. D Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mohammed Ibrahim Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Mahesh Nayak Vs A.N. Shailaja

N Pious Arun Kumar Vs the State

P. Vijay Babu Vs State by Kengeri P. S.

Rajesh Vs State of Karnataka