Dismissed

Shamsheer Bahadur Singh v. the Station House Officer

Karnataka HC22 Nov 2023CRL.P/7201/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC sought to quash proceedings for cheating and forgery involving the use of morphed identity cards to board an aircraft. The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner's confession proved awareness of the fraud, necessitating a trial to establish innocence.

What did the court decide?

Petition to quash proceedings in C.C.No.1463/2013 dismissed.

Shamsheer Bahadur Singh Vs the Station House Officer — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:42081 CRL.P No. 7201 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7201 OF 2021

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHAMSHEER BAHADUR SINGH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS S/O. OM PRAKASH SINGH R/AT. KUSHINAGAR, UTTAR PRADESH NOW R/AT C/O.RANJEETH SINGH, NO.3237, 7^TH CROSS, 2^ND MAIN, NAGAMMA LAYOUT, KAVALBYRASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 032 (BY SRI. ASLAM KHAN M., ADVOCATE)

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT POLICE STATION, BANGALORE RURAL, DEVANAHALLI REP. BY LEARNED ASST. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001

¶12

MOHIT KHATRI GUEST SERVICES MANAGER, KINGFISHER AIRLINES LTD., BANGALORE-560001

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SMT. WAHEEDA M.M., HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1)

¶15

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.1463/2013 AND SET ASIDE THE COMPLAINT

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:42081 CRL.P No. 7201 of 2021

¶18

DATED 07.05.2012 REGISTERED IN CR.NO.58/2012 BY WHICH COGNIZANCE WAS TAKEN BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE HAD REGISTERED A CASE UNDER SECTIONS 419, 420, 471 READ WITH 34 OF IPC AND CHARGE SHEETED IN C.C.NO.1463/2013 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND J.M.F.C., DEVANAHALLI.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner has challenged the prosecution launched against him in C.C.No.1463/2013 pending trial before the Principal Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and JMFC, Devanahalli for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (henceforth referred to as 'IPC').

¶22

The respondent No.2 being an employee of an airline informed the respondent No.1 about the commission of offence by the petitioner and two others. The respondent No.2 stated that on 07.05.2012 three guests had checked-in at 18:00 hours. At about 20:00 hours, three more guests holding ticket printouts of the three guests who had already checked-in, reported at the check-in counter. They furnished

¶23

¶24

NC: 2023:KHC:42081 CRL.P No. 7201 of 2021

¶25

morphed photo identity cards of the guests who had already checked-in. The guest services supervisor realized that the guests found on the ticket print outs had already checked in and after verifying the photo identity card found that the same was matching with the guests already checked in. She therefore, spoke to the check-in staff to verify whether the guests who had reported at 18:00 hours had already boarded the aircraft. Since the check-in staff was not sure, a duplicate boarding pass was issued to the petitioners and two others and to verify the credentials of both the sets of passenger who had checked-in. At 20:40 hours, the Security Supervisor was informed and after conducting a check of the guests list and after verifying the original identity cards, they found that the petitioner and two others were carrying ticket print outs and morphed photo identity card of the passengers who had already checked-in, as per the advice of their travel agent namely Badami travels.

¶26

Based on this, the respondent No.1 registered Cr.No.58/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of IPC and took up investigation.

¶27

¶28

NC: 2023:KHC:42081 CRL.P No. 7201 of 2021

¶29

The respondent No.1 after investigating the offences, found that the petitioners and two other accused had furnished morphed identity cards of the three passengers and were attempting to board the aircraft based on the tickets generated in respect of three passengers. The investigating officer therefore, filed a charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 471 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶30

The Trial Court perused the charge sheets and the materials placed along with it and after being satisfied that the cognizable offence as stated therein were committed, took cognizance and registered C.C.No.1463/2013, issued process to the petitioner and two other accused. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this court seeking to quash the proceedings.

¶31

The learned counsel for petitioners contends that

¶32

the petitioner was a student who had come to Bengaluru to COMED-K examination and that the petitioner was cheated by the travel agent, who had furnished a ticket and a boarding pass to travel back to Delhi. He therefore, submits that the

¶33

¶34

NC: 2023:KHC:42081 CRL.P No. 7201 of 2021

¶35

petitioner ought to have been cited as a witness and not as an accused.

¶36

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader contended that the identity card which was morphed by the petitioner and two other accused did not contain their names, but it contained only their photographs and name found on the morphed identity card was that of petitioner and two other accused. She submitted that the petitioner was not oblivious of this, but was aware of this fact which is evident from his confession statement. She submits that this is not a case, where this Court should exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash the proceedings, having regard to the nature of the crime and the consequences that could have happened in the event of the petitioner and other accused boarding the flight.

¶37

I have considered the submissions made by the

¶38

learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader.

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:42081 CRL.P No. 7201 of 2021

¶41

As rightly submitted by the learned High Court Government Pleader, the document filed along with the charge sheet disclose that the petitioner was aware of the fact that the identity card furnished by him at the check-in counter did not belong to him, but was morphed. He infact stated in his confession statement that he was advised by the travel agent to impersonate the person who had already check-in. Therefore, there are shades of the petitioner conspiring with the other accused in attempting to board the aircraft by furnishing false documents.

¶42

Under these circumstances, the petitioner has to establish his innocence and this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction to set at naught the prosecution.

¶43

In that view of the matter, the petition fails and is dismissed.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

¶46

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

Shamsheer Bahadur Singh v. the Station House Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamsheer Bahadur Singh v. the Station House Officer

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

M.C.Ashok Vs Vincent Pinto

Mr.Moin Ulla Khan Vs K.R.S.M. Educational and Charitable Trust

Sri Chikkanarasimhaiah @ Raju Vs Sri N Narasimhaiah

Smt B S Prema Vs Mahalinge Gowda

Director of Municipal Administration Vs Karnataka State Pollution Control Board

Mr. Mohammed Haneef Nadaf Vs State by