Allowed

Sri. Chandan U v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC15 Nov 2023CRL.P/9798/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed Criminal Petition No. 9798 of 2023. The Court noted that the parties had amicably resolved the dispute and the complainant had no objection to quashing proceedings. Consequently, to avoid abuse of process of law, the Court quashed the impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 8198/2020.

What did the court decide?

The impugned proceedings in C.C. No. 8198/2020 pending before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru were quashed.

Sri. Chandan U Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:40735 CRL.P No. 9798 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9798 OF 2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. CHANDAN U SON OF UMASHANKAR S AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 302 ABOVE NILGIRI SUPERMARKET VIJAYSHREEE LAYOUR, KODICHIKANAHALLI BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 068.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. VIJI KUMAR A, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CEN POLICE STATION, CENTRAL DIVISION, BENGALURU CITY REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶12

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

¶13

SRI. ANUBHAV AGARWAL SON OF SATISH AGARWAL, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/A NO. 75, SECTION 4, 16TH CROSS ROAD, BDA COMPLEX, HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 102.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. VENKATASATYANARAYANA A, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. SHASHANK NAGENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF COGNIZANCE TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MAGISTRATE COURT IN C.C.NO.8198/2020, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 66(d), 67 OF I.T. ACT, R/W 419, 420, 384 OF IPC AND THE SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS THEREWITH, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.4358/2019, PENDING BEFORE THE 1ST ADDITIONAL CHIEF

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:40735 CRL.P No. 9798 of 2023

¶19

METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU AND PASS ANY OTHER ORDER THAT THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent No.1.

¶23

Mr. Shashank Nagendra, learned counsel files power on behalf of respondent No.2. The same is placed on record.

¶24

The petitioner is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 66(d), 67 of Information Technology Act, r/w Sections 419, 420, 384 IPC.

¶25

The case of the prosecution is that, the defacto complainant came in contact with unknown person who had created a fake account in the Instagram and had obtained explicit pictures of the defacto complainant and had blackmailed him for Rs.15,000/-, and if he did not pay the amount he would share the explicit pictures with friends and family members of the defacto complainant

¶26

The parties are present before this Court through video conferencing and their respective counsel have filed an application under Section 320 (8) r/w Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for compounding of offences along with joint affidavit, stating that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and in terms of the settlement the petitioner has transferred a sum of Rs.25,000/- to the defacto-complainant

¶27

¶28

NC: 2023:KHC:40735 CRL.P No. 9798 of 2023

¶29

towards the damages for causing mental agony to the defactocomplainant-respondent No.2, and the respondent No.2 has no objection for quashing the impugned Proceedings.

¶30

The same are taken on record.

¶31

Though the offences alleged against the petitioner are cognizable and non-compoundable, however, having regard to the fact that, the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, and the defacto-complainant has no objection for quashing the impugned proceedings, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioner- accused is subjected to trial, since the probability of his conviction is remote and bleak in view of the settlement. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶32

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

i) The Criminal Petition is allowed;

¶35

ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.8198/2020 pending on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru is hereby quashed.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

Sri. Chandan U v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Chandan U v. 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

Usha C R Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Ramachandra M.C. Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Shwetha Vs State by Tumakuru Women Police Station

Sri. Giriswamy. D Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Mohammed Ibrahim Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Mahesh Nayak Vs A.N. Shailaja