Allowed

Prabhakar @ Prabhu S/O. Yankappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Sept 2024CRL.P/101675/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.2 sought quashing of proceedings under Sections 420, 465, 468, 472 and 120(B) IPC concerning non-payment for fertilizer and seeds supplied by respondent No.2 as agent of CW-24. The Court held mere non-payment is not cheating, the dispute is civil, and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings against petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.300/2016 before Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Yelaburga at Koppal quashed.

Prabhakar @ Prabhu S/O. Yankappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13593 CRL.P No. 101675 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101675 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PRABHU SHIVAREDDY @ PRABHAKAR @ PRABHU S/O VENKANNA JADAR, AGE:36 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O.KARUR SANTEPETE, TQ.SIRAGUPPA, DIST:BALLARI-583101.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SANTOSH B MALLIGAWAD, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA KUKANOOR PS REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD 580 008

¶13

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶14

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SURESH S/O. SHIVAPPA KOPPAD AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC.BUSINESS. R/O.2ND CROSS, GAVISHRINAGAR, KOPPAL 583231

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PETITIONER ACCUSED NO. 2 IN CC NO. 300/2016 PENDING ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, YELABURGA AT KOPPAL FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420, 465, 468, 472, 120(B) OF IPC.

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13593 CRL.P No. 101675 of 2023

¶20

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

¶21

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶22

ORAL ORDER

¶23

This petition is filed by accused No.2 praying to quash entire proceedings in C.C.No.300/2016 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Yelaburga at Koppal registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 472, 120(B) of IPC.

¶24

The respondent No.2 has filed a complaint and the same came to be registered against the petitioner and others in Crime No.75/2015 of Kuknoor P.S. for offences under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 472, r/w Section 34 of IPC. The police after investigation, has filed a chargesheet against the petitioner and other accused for offences under Sections 420, 465, 468, 472, 120(B) of IPC.

¶25

On the basis of the chargesheet, a case came to be registered against the petitioner and other accused in C.C.No.300/2016 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13593 CRL.P No. 101675 of 2023

¶27

and JMFC, Yelburga at Koppal. The proceedings of the said criminal case are sought to be quashed by the petitioneraccused No.2 in this petition.

¶28

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State. Inspite of service of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and unrepresented.

¶29

Learned counsel for petitioner would contend

¶30

that the respondent No.2 as a agent of CW-24 has supplied fertilizer and seeds to the petitioner and others and the price of the said fertilizer and seeds has not paid by the petitioner and other accused. A complaint has been filed. Considering said aspect civil remedy of recovering money for goods sold, a criminal complaint has been filed. He contended that attempting to cloak a civil dispute with a criminal nature amounts to abuse of process of Court. Ingredient of complaint and chargesheet materials does not attract any of the offences alleged against the petitioner. With this he prayed to allow the petition.

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13593 CRL.P No. 101675 of 2023

¶32

Learned HCGP would contend that by not paying money for fertilizers and seeds purchased amount to cheating. The charge sheet materials show prima facie case against petitioner and others for the offences alleged against them. There are no grounds for quashing the proceedings. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶33

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused chargesheet and other materials placed on record.

¶34

On perusal of averments of complaint, it would indicate that respondent No.2 is an agent of CW.24, who has supplied fertilizers and seeds to petitioner and other accused and they in turn sold to some agriculturists. The complaint further indicates that petitioner and other accused did not pay price of fertilizers and seeds to respondent No.2 or C.W.24. Merely, non-payment of price of good purchased does not amounts to cheating. The remedy for respondent No.2 or C.W.24 is to file a suit for recovery of price of goods sold by them to accused

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13593 CRL.P No. 101675 of 2023

¶36

persons. However, complaint is filed to arm twist the petitioner and other accused to recover the price of goods sold. The ingredients of offences alleged are not attracted against the petitioner and other accused. In Prof.R.K.Vijayasarthy and others V/s. Sudha Seetharam and another, reported in (2019) 16 SCC 739 the Hon’ble Apex Court has considered similar case and held that attempting to cloak a civil dispute with criminal nature is abuse of process of Court and quashed proceedings. Considering said aspect, proceedings against petitioner is abuse of process of law. In the result, the following:

¶37

ORDER

¶38

i. The petition is allowed. ii. The proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.300/2016 pending on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Yelaburga at Koppal registered for offences punishable

¶39

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13593 CRL.P No. 101675 of 2023

¶40

under Sections 420, 465, 468, 472, 120(B) of IPC are quashed.

¶41

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶42

RKM,VB CT: CNB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67

Prabhakar @ Prabhu S/O. Yankappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakar @ Prabhu S/O. Yankappa 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Uday S/O Ramakrishna Shetty Vs the State of Karnataka

Renuka D/O Mallappa Karennavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Nitin S/O Chandrakat Seth Vs Smt. Basavnewwa W/O Basavanneppa Betageri

Shahbaz S/O Mohammad Usman Qureshi Vs the State of Karnataka

Prabhu Shivareddy @ Prabhakar @ Prabhu S/O Venkanna Tadar Vs the State of Karnataka

Mandarapu Mandhava Rao Vs State of Karnataka