Allowed

Jayashree v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Jan 2024WP/1698/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition filed by Jayashree D/o Late Chandru to quash the charge sheet against her in a case involving vehicular accident. The court held that since the deceased father took the vehicle without the petitioner's knowledge, continuing proceedings against her constituted an abuse of process of law. Consequently, the criminal proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.38820/2022 are quashed.

Jayashree Vs State of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:3521 WP No. 1698 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN WRIT PETITION NO. 1698 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

JAYASHREE D/O LATE CHANDRU, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT NO.3, MADAVA REDDY BUILDING, 1^ST FLOOR, 9^TH CROSS, BEHIND GANESHA TEMPLE, HOODI GARDEN, BANGALORE CITY - 560 048.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. SRIKANTH N V., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY K.R.PURAM TRAFFIC P S, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶13

Digitally signed by VEDAVATHI A K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SRI. ANIL KUMAR C S/O LATE CHANDRU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/A C/O MADHAV REDDY BUILDING, 9^TH CROSS, TIGALARA PALYA, HOODI GARDEN, BANGALORE - 560 048.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKAT SATYANARAYANA A., HCGP FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶16

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO. 38820/2022 ON THE FILE OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:3521 WP No. 1698 of 2024

¶18

TRAFFIC COURT-1, MAYOHALL, BANGALORE INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2 HEREIN BASED ON THE COMPLAINT FILED BY R2 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 279, 304(A), AND U/S 3(1) R/W 181 3(1), 5, 180, 181, 129, 177 OF I.P.C. IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AS PER ANNEXURE-D REGISTERED BY K.R. PURAM TRAFFIC POLICE STATION IS CONCERNED.

¶19

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

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.1/State.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Issuing notice to respondent No.2, is hereby dispensed with.

¶23

This writ petition is filed by the accused No.2, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the charge sheet filed against the petitioner in C.C.No.38820/2022 on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court - 1, Mayohall, Bangalore, based on the complaint in Crime No.146/2021 registered by K.R. Puram Traffic Police station for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) of IPC and under Sections 3(1) read with 181, 5, 180, 181, 129, 177 of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:3521 WP No. 1698 of 2024

¶25

The case of the prosecution is that, on the complaint of respondent No.2, the police registered FIR against the deceased Chandru, who was the rider of Honda Activa and is also father of respondent No.2. It is alleged that on 18.11.2021 at 6 a.m., his father took Honda Activa motor scooter, belonging to the petitioner for the purpose of purchasing the flower and vegetables for the house. But he met with an accident and died. The charge sheet came to be filed against the deceased/accused No.1, for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 304A of IPC and sections 3 read with 181 of Motor Vehicles Act. As the accused No.1 is dead, the charges were abated. However, police have filed charge sheet against this petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 5 read with 180 of Motor Vehicles Act, alleging that this petitioner had given permission to ride the vehicle to the deceased, being the RC owner of the Honda Activa for riding the motor vehicle who does not possess any valid license.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that without the knowledge of the petitioner, the vehicle was taken by the father and he has met with an accident and that she has

¶27

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:3521 WP No. 1698 of 2024

¶28

not committed any offence. Also, there is no investigation in respect of the oral permission granted by the petitioner for riding of the vehicle by her father. Hence, prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings.

¶29

Per contra learned HCGP objected the petition.

¶30

Having heard the arguments, perused the records, the investigation paper does not reveal and no witnesses stated that the deceased took the vehicle of this petitioner, with the knowledge of the RC owner of the vehicle by the deceased who was having no valid license as per Section 3 of Motor Vehicles Act. However, he has taken vehicle from the house in the morning at 6 a.m., itself without knowledge of the daughter or RC owner. Such being the case, when there is no material furnished by the Investigating Officer, to say this petitioner knowing fully with knowledge had given the vehicle to the father, who was having no valid license. Such being the case, continuing the process against the petitioner is nothing but abuse of process of law. Hence, liable to be quashed.

¶31

Accordingly, the petition is allowed.

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:3521 WP No. 1698 of 2024

¶33

¶34

The criminal proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.38820/2022 on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court - 1, Mayohall, Bangalore, based on the complaint in Crime No.146/2021 registered by K.R. Puram Traffic Police station, is hereby quashed.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38 CT:SK

Jayashree v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayashree 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

Somashekarappa H P Vs State by Police Inspector

Smt. Vignesh G Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.K.Nilesh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Krishne Gowda Vs Smt. Mahadevamma

Smt. Jyothi @ Jyothamma Vs State by Nayakanahatty Police Station

Shivanna Vs State by Rampura Police