Allowed

D Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC1 Mar 2024CRL.P/1142/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought quashing of an FIR alleging cheating, forgery and criminal breach of trust arising from a sale deed dispute. The parties filed a joint compromise application to compound the offence; the High Court permitted compounding and quashed the criminal proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to compound the offence; FIR Crime No.147/2019 and proceedings pending before IV ACMM Bengaluru quashed.

D Venkatesh Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:8780 CRL.P No. 1142 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1142 OF 2020

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

D. VENKATESH

¶9

AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, S/O LATE DORESWAMY, R/AT NO.66, 3^RD CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶10

V. PRASANTH AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, S/O D. VENKATESH, RESIDING AT NO.66, 3^RD CROSS, LALBAGH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 027.

¶11

Digitally signed by BHAVANI BAI G Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

M. VIJAYASHEKAR REDDY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O PUNDAREEKA REDDY, R/AT NO.137/4, 7^TH MAIN ROAD,

¶13

3^RD CROSS, K.G.HALLI, ABBIGERE MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 015.

¶14

¶15

NC: 2024:KHC:8780 CRL.P No. 1142 of 2020

¶16

THIRUPATHAIAH

¶17

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, S/O ERUKULAIAH, R/AT NO.23, SRINIVASA NILAYA, NEAR NARASIMHA TEMPLE, ABBIGERE MAIN ROAD, JALAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 015.

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI. HARSHA KUMAR GOWDA H R., ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

STATE OF KARNATAKA SHO BY KENGERI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶22

DR. G. C. VIJAYALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, D/O LATE. G.R.CHENGALARAYA NAIDU, RESIDING AT NO.17, PUTTANNA ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H.S.SOMNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶24

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CR.NO.147/2019 ARISING OUT OF PCR NO.4927/2019 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.406, 408, 468, 469, 471, 418, 420 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE 4^TH ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU.

¶25

¶26

NC: 2024:KHC:8780 CRL.P No. 1142 of 2020

¶27

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

¶28

ORDER

¶29

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the FIR in Crime No.147/2019 registered by the Kengeri Police station, Bengaluru, arising out of PCR No.4927/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 408, 418, 420, 469, 471 read with section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶30

Learned counsel, Sri.Sunil S., appeared for

¶31

respondent No.2.

¶32

During the pendency of the petition, both petitioner Nos.2 5o 4 and respondent No.2 appeared before the Court along with their counsels and filed joint compromise application on I.A.No.1/2024 under Section 320 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., for seeking permission of the court to compound the offence.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:8780 CRL.P No. 1142 of 2020

¶35

Both petitioners and respondent No.2 appeared and

¶36

submits that they have settled their issues and the sale deed said to be cancelled.

¶37

Submission of both the parties are placed on record. In view of the settlement between the parties the parties are permitted to compound the office and petition deserves to be allowed.

¶38

Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed .

¶39

Consequently, the criminal proceedings against the petitioners in Crime No.147/2019 registered by the Kengeri Police station, Bengaluru, arising out of PCR No.4927/2019 pending on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 CT:SK

D Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D Venkatesh 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

R Bharathesh Vs H a Bhaskar Prasanna

Sri N C Shivakumar Vs State of Karnataka

Ravindra Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Manjunatha B J Vs State by

Isak Alias Ichu Vs the State

Avinash v P Vs State by K R Pete Rural Police