Allowed

B. K. Satyanarayan v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Sept 2024CRL.P/1108/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR arising from a commercial dispute over investment and business dealings with a private company. The parties filed a joint memo recording an amicable full and final settlement. Satisfied that the dispute was settled, the court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR.

What did the court decide?

FIR dated 21.01.2021 (Annexure-A) in Cr.No.14/2021 of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru, on the file of IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, quashed.

B. K. Satyanarayan Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1108 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

B.K. SATYANARAYAN S/O. B.R. KESHAVAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 123 A/B, 16^TH KILOMETRE, BEGUR-KOPPA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 068.

¶9

K.R. BALAJI S/O. LATE K.R. RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 1427, 23^RD MAIN, BANASHANKARI 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 070.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. PRADYUMNA K.V., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRIRANGA S., ADVOCATE) AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANASHANKARI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR BENGALURU - 01.

¶14

DEEPAK. M. G. S/O. LATE M. C. GOPALA RAO, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 1882, 10^TH MAIN, 31^ST CROSS, BANASHANKARI 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 070.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. NIYANAND V. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DATED 21.01.2021 (ANNEXURE-A) IN CR.NO.14/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ACMM, BANGALORE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

Sri.Nityanand V Naik, learned counsel submits that he has filed Vakalath even for respondent Nos.3 and 4. Office is directed to take note of the same.

¶21

Petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 are

¶22

present with their counsel. The parties are identified by their respective counsel.

¶23

Learned counsel for petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 have filed joint memo of settlement dated 13.09.2024 and submit that as per the memorandum of settlement, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have no objection to allow the criminal petition.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶26

4. The terms of the memorandum of settlement

¶27

reads as under:

¶28

"1. WHEREAS, The Parties of the First Part is a registered partnership firm and its partners. The Firm is engaged in the business of manufacturing of engineering components. B. K. Satyanarayan is the Managing Partner of Mactech Engineering. During the course of business, Mactech Engineering- started a new line of business of manufacturing LED Lights for industrial usage under the brand name INCA LED. On 16.12.2018, the Parties of the Second Part approached the partners of Mactech Engineering and represented that their company, INFII Solar Solutions India Private Limited, is into the solar water heater business and further showed interest to buy one of the products of Mactech Engineering by name Solar LED Home Light Kit at 1000 pieces per month 2. During the course of initial discussions, the Parties of the Second Part requested the Parties of the First Part to invest in their company as they were suffering from a severe cash crunch. Therefore, Mactech Engineering came to an understanding with INFII Solar Solutions India Private Limited and agreed to invest in INFII Solar Solutions India Private Limited.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶31

3. However, certain disputes arose between the Parties of the First Part and the Parties of the Second Part regarding the payment of the amount, utilisation, managing the business etc. As the result, following cases were filed by the parties against each other, the details of which are as under:-

¶32

i. C.C No. 50993 of 2021 Mactech Engineering v. Infii Solar Solutions India Private Limited and Others (Before the XXXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate)

¶33

ii. P.C.R No.1416 of 2021 Mactech Engineering v. Infii Solar Solutions India Private Limited and Others (Before the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate)

¶34

iii. Criminal Petition No.5468 of 2020-BK Satyanarayan and Another v. State of Karnataka and Others (Before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka)

¶35

iv. Criminal Petition No. 1108 Of 2021-BK Satyanarayan and Another v. State of Karnataka and Another (Before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka)

¶36

4. The Parties after due deliberations and negotiations and at the instance of well wishers have settled the disputes amicably.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶39

Wherefore, this deed witnesses as follows:-

¶40

a. This memorandum of Settlement between the parties has been executed out of their own free will and consent, without any undue- influence, duress and coercion and all parties to the Memorandum of settlement have understood the contents thereof and confirm that the same are correct.

¶41

b. The First party has agreed to hand over the Machineries (as per Annexure A) of Second Party Company which were stored on the premises of First Party partnership firm to Mr. Deepak MG only after successful withdrawal of all the cases as mentioned in this MOU.

¶42

c. The First Party has agreed to pay Rs. 20,00,000/to Mr. Ramesh Gundu Rao out of which the First party has already paid Rs.3,00,000/- (Rs. 2,00,000/on 06-Apr-2024; Rs. 50,000/- on 06-Aug-2024 & Rs. 50,000/-on 05-Sep-2024) by way of bank transfer. The First party agreed to pay the balance amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- through Demand Draft Number 004332 dated 05-Sep-2024 drawn in Saraswat CoOperative Bank Ltd and will be handed over to Mr Ramesh Gundu Rao only after the successful withdrawal of all the cases as mentioned in this MoU.

¶43

d. The First party has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 18,00,000/- to Mr. Nadeem Ahmed through DD number 004331 dated 05-Sep-2024 drawn in

¶44

¶45

NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶46

Saraswat Co-Operative Bank Ltd and will be handed over to Mr Nadeem only after the successful withdrawal of all the cases as mentioned in this MoU.

¶47

e. The Parties of the First Part have agreed work with Mr. Vinod Ram N.V and assist him in his business, professional services as per separate agreement.

¶48

f. The Parties of the Second Part shall file a Memo in both the case bearing Criminal Petition No.5468/2020 and Criminal Petition No. 1108/2021 requesting the court to allow the Criminal Petition and that they have no objection for the Complaint/First Information Report to be quashed. g. The Party to the First Part shall withdraw the C.C No. 50993/2021 pending on the file of XXXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore and P.C.R No.1416 of 2021 pending on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bangalore after quashing of the Complaint /FIR which are subject matters of Criminal Petition No.5468/2020 and Criminal Petition No. 1108/2021. Both the parties shall withdraw all cases, disputes, claims as this is the full and final settlement arrived between the parties in good faith.

¶49

h. Both the Parties further agree to withdraw any other proceedings that they may have instituted against each other which are not within the knowledge of the Parties of either part.

¶50

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶51

i. It is agreed among the parties that no further proceedings either civil or criminal in nature will be initiated by neither the Parties of the First Part against the Parties of the Second Part nor by Parties of the Second Part against the Parties of the First Part with reference to the above subject matter or remotely connected to the above subject matter. Failure to adhere to this settlement or default will result in breach of trust and contemptuous.

¶52

j. It is confirmed that Parties of the First Part don't have any financial obligations with the Parties of the Second Part and the parties confirm that they have amicably settled all their disputes and further affirm that they have no claims whatsoever against each other.

¶53

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Parties hereto have agreed and singed this Memorandum of Settlement in the presence of the witnesses attesting hereunder on this 10th day of September 2024 at Bengaluru."

¶54

On enquiry, petitioner No.2 and respondent

¶55

Nos.2 to 5 submit that they have settled the dispute amicably and that petitioner No.1 is unable to attend the Court as there is bereavement in his family and prays for allowing the petition.

¶56

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:39481 CRL.P No. 1108 of 2021

¶57

Looking to the memorandum of settlement

¶58

dated 13.09.2024 filed by petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2, I am satisfied that the dispute between the parties is amicably settled. Hence, the petition is liable to be allowed.

¶59

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

Criminal Petition is allowed .

¶62

The First Information Report dated 21.01.2021 (Annexure-A) in Cr.No.14/2021 of Banashankari Police Station, Bengaluru, on the file of IV Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.

¶63

SD/(M G UMA) JUDGE

¶64

RR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 25

B. K. Satyanarayan v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. K. Satyanarayan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Venkatesh H C Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Manjunatha G N Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Arun Kumar N K Vs the State of Karnataka

Althaf Ulla Shareep @ Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohan Kumar T S Vs the State of Karnataka

Madappa Vs State of Karnataka