Allowed

Sri B G Gangadharaiah v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC22 Jul 2024CRL.P/3622/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Crl.P filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings against ten petitioners in a case involving offences under IPC sections 120B, 409, 420, and 506, praying for quashing as pleadings were identical to earlier quashed petitions.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings insofar as petitioners are concerned and disposal of pending interlocutory applications.

Sri B G Gangadharaiah Vs State of Karnataka — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:28509 CRL.P No. 3622 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3622 OF 2020 (482)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI B G GANGADHARAIAH S/O LATE BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.323, SERVICE ROAD, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, 9TH BLOCK NAGARATHAVI, BENGALURU-560072.

¶10

SRI N RAMESH S/O H NANJUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.208, 9TH CROSS, M.P.M. LAYOUT, NAGARAGHAVI II STAGE BENGALURU-560056.

¶11

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SURESH, S/O SANNAPUTTEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/A NO.1030/1 GANSHA GUDI STREET HUNSUR, MYSORE DISTRICT.

¶13

SRI CHANNAKESHAVA S/O LATE B C MUDDAIAH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT BHANDIHALLI NITTUR HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 223.

¶14

SRI NAGARAJU S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.107/1

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:28509 CRL.P No. 3622 of 2020

¶16

DODDAMANDINAHALLI, KANDLI POST, VIJAYANAGARA EXTENSION HASSAN- 573201.

¶17

SRI RAJESHA H T S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT HANIYAMBADI VILLAGE MANGALA POST, MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571403.

¶18

SRI H G LOKESH S/O GOWDEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT VIDHYANAGARA CHANNARAYAPATNA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201.

¶19

SRI KEMPEGOWDA D K S/O KARIGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.163, 4TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, SAMPIGE LAYOUT BENGALURU-560079.

¶20

SRI HONNEGOWDA @ MANJUNATHA S/O NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/A NO.36/4, 1ST A CROSS ROAD SUVARNAJYOTHI NAGAR, NAGADEVANAHALLI BENGALURU-560056.

¶21

SRI PRABHAKAR S/O PAPEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/A NO.10, AMMA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, BEHIND ULLALA MAIN ROAD JNANABHARATHI POST BENGALURU-560056

¶22

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D.L. JAGADEESH, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SMT. RAKSHITHA D J., ADVOCATE)

¶23

¶24

NC: 2024:KHC:28509 CRL.P No. 3622 of 2020

¶25

AND:

¶26

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY DODDAPETE P.S. CHIKKAAMGALURU BY ITS ASSISTANT DY. S P, E O D., C I D, BENGALURU REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING BENGALURU-560001.

¶27

SRI B K VEKATESH S/O KRISNAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, BANNIKERE VILLAGE KOMMANALU POST SHIMOGA TALUK AND DISTRICT KARNATAKA-573 403.

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶30

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED IN SPL.C.C.NO.41/2019 (CR.NO.6/2016) ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHIKKAMAGALURU, INITIATED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DODDAPETE P.S., THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 120B, 409,420,506 OF IPC R/W SECTION 9 OF THE KARNATAKA INTEREST OF DEPOSITORS IN FINANCIAL ESTABLISHMENT ACT.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:28509 CRL.P No. 3622 of 2020

¶33

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

¶34

ORDER

¶35

It is not in dispute that in respect of criminal complaints, several criminal cases were registered against the petitioners and in three cases the petitioners herein had challenged the prosecution in Crl.P.No.3583/2019, Crl.P.No.5752/2019 and Crl.P.No.5754/2019.

¶36

It is also not in dispute that these three petitions were allowed holding that there was no material to show that these petitioners were aware of the transactions brought out by the Company and its intention was to defraud the depositors. Since the averments made against the petitioners are more or less identical, in the light of the order passed in above mentioned criminal petitions, these proceedings are liable to be quashed and accordingly they are quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned. The petition is, accordingly, allowed.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:28509 CRL.P No. 3622 of 2020

¶39

3. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending

¶40

interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Sri B G Gangadharaiah v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri B G Gangadharaiah 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

Alpine Pyramid Apartment Vs the Bangalore Electiricity Company Limited

Rajamma Vs the Managing Director Kptcl

H Narasimhamurthy Vs the Secretary Regional Transport Authority

V G Anand Vs R Kiran Kumar

Sri Sathya Murthy Vs Smt M Preethi

Sri. Bhash Vs Sri. Anjaneyaulu C