Allowed

Sangeeta and Anr. v. State and Anr.

Karnataka HC18 Sept 2024CRL.P/200580/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings against two accused persons. The court held that specific overt acts were not alleged against them despite their names being in the FIR, making the trial a breach of legal process after five years of stagnation.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in C.C.No.488/2019 against accused Nos. 44 and 45 are quashed.

Sangeeta and Anr. Vs State and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7029 CRL.P No. 200580 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶3

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200580 OF 2024

¶8

(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SANGEETA W/O PANDIT SULEKAR AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR, R/O FAZALPUR, TQ. ALAND DIST. KALABURAGI-585236

¶11

PANDIT S/O BAKSARAPPA SULEKAR AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR, R/O FAZALPUR, TQ. ALAND DIST. KALABURAGI-585236

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. BASAVALING NASI, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by KHAJAAMEEN L MALAGHAN Location: High Court Of Karnataka

¶16

STATE THROUGH MADANAHIPPARGA POLICE STATION, REP. BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH-585102

¶17

SMT. KALAPAN W/O SHANTAMALLA KEROOR AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O MADANAHIPPARGA VILLAGE, TQ. ALAND DIST. KALABURAGI-388001.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. ANITA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R1;

¶20

SRI. CHAITANYAKUMAR C.M., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC

¶22

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7029 CRL.P No. 200580 of 2024

¶23

COURT AT ALAND BEARING C.C NO. 488/2019 FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 143, 147, 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 READ WITH 149 OF IPC, MADANAHIPPARGA P.S. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN)

¶27

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused

¶28

Nos.44 and 45 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.488/2019 pending on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC Court, Aland, arising out of Crime No.22/2019 registered by the Madanahipparagi Police Station and charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7029 CRL.P No. 200580 of 2024

¶31

The case of the prosecution is that on the complaint of respondent No.2, the police have registered the FIR against the accused No.1/Devindra and 45 others. It is alleged by the complainant that she is having a shop in the bus-stand and accused persons often used to quarrel and asked her to vacate the premises. On this background, on 07.03.2019 at 10:00 a.m. all 45 accused persons came and accused No.1 said to be assaulted her, dragged her, outraged her modesty and abused her and threatened to kill her, if she is not vacated the premises. At that time, some of the witnesses one Shivaputra and Seema came and rescued her. Since she has not sustained any injury, and filed complaint on the very same day. After registering the FIR, the police investigated the matter and filed the charge-sheet and these petitioners shown as accused No.44 and 45, which is under challenge.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioners has

¶33

contended that there is no overt acts attributed against these petitioners, they have been falsely implicated. It is

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7029 CRL.P No. 200580 of 2024

¶35

pre-planed complaint filed by the respondent No.2. The names were falsely given by the complainant to target the petitioners in order to encroach the place from the public place. The trial is not yet under progress for last five years. Hence, prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings.

¶36

Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has seriously objected the petition and has contended that these petitioners along with other accused persons came and assaulted the complainant, outraged her modesty and criminal intimidated her, the matter is required for trial. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.

¶37

Per contra, the learned High Court Government

¶38

Pleader also supports the arguments of the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and contended that all the accused persons assembled with a common object to commit offence. Therefore, prayed for dismissing the petition.

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7029 CRL.P No. 200580 of 2024

¶40

Having heard arguments and perused the

¶41

records, on perusal of the same, complainant has filed one para of complaint against all 45 persons stating that she is running a shop in the bus-stand where the where the accused No.1 and others said to be belongs to some Seva Dala and demanded the complainant to vacate the premises as it belongs to public property. On that background, they said to be quarrel with the complainant. On careful reading of the complaint as well as chargesheet material, the entire allegations goes against accused No.1/Devendra, who is said to be assaulted with hands obstructed her, outraged her modesty by pulling her cloth and threatened her with dire consequences. Though the names of the petitioners mentioned in the FIR, but there is no specific overt acts against these petitioners. They may be members of the said group. But there is no specific allegations against the petitioners in statement of the witnesses as well as in the complaint. The petitioner No.1 said to be public servant. On perusal of the record, absolutely there is no material placed on record to connect

¶42

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-K:7029 CRL.P No. 200580 of 2024

¶43

the accused in this crime. Therefore, conducting trial against these petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of law and inspite of last five years there is no progress held in the Trial except appearance of accused persons and even not secured the presence of the witnesses for conducting the trial. Such being the case, continuing the

¶44

case against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of law. Hence, the petition is liable to be quashed.

¶45

8. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER

¶46

(i) The petition is allowed.

¶47

(ii) The criminal proceedings in C.C.No.488/2019 against these petitioners/accused Nos.44 and 45 is

¶48

hereby quashed.

¶49

Sd/(K NATARAJAN) JUDGE

¶50

SDU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16 CT:SI

Sangeeta and Anr. v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta and Anr. v. State and Anr.

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

Gopal Vs the Spl Executive Magistrate

P. Nagaram Babu and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.

Prabhu Swamy Vs the State of Karnataka through New Ton Police Station Bidar

Jagdish Patil Vs State

Gopal and Ors. Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.

Syed Youns Quadri @ Syed Abdul Rehaman @ Mohd. Younus Quadri Vs the State of Karnataka and Anr.