Allowed

Suresh Jain v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jan 2024WP/26654/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka quashed criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 748/2007 pending against the petitioners. The Court allowed an innovative compromise application filed jointly by the petitioners and some respondents. Being a compoundable offence arising from a settled civil dispute, the Court permitted the offence to be compounded under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Injunction Application allowed; offence compounded; criminal proceedings in C.C.No.748/2007 quashed.

Suresh Jain Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:2726 WP No. 26654 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN WRIT PETITION NO. 26654 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SURESH JAIN

¶8

S/O CHEMGAL LAL JAIN, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, NO.26, REST HOUSE ROAD, BRIGADE ROAD CROSS, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶9

SONAL JAIN

¶10

D/O SHANTHILAL JAIN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI. DILIP KUMAR I S., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

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

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEVANAHALLI POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶16

SRI. MUNIRAJU S/O LATE SRI RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT PUTTAPPA TEMPLE STREET, DEVANAHALLI - 562 110.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:2726 WP No. 26654 of 2023

¶19

SRI. GOPAL

¶20

S/O LATE SRI KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT PUTTAPPA TEMPLE STREET, DEVANAHALLI - 562 110.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ARUN G., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 748/2007 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DEVANAHALLI AS FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 465, 468, 471, 420 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860.

¶24

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

¶25

ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed by the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India read with 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.748/2007 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, arising out of Crime No.193/2006 registered by the Devanahalli Police station, and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 420 read with 34 of the IPC.

¶27

¶28

NC: 2024:KHC:2726 WP No. 26654 of 2023

¶29

During the pendency of the petition, both petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared before the court and filed joint compromise application and are seeking permission of the court to compound the offence. It is submitted that this case is arising out of the civil dispute. Now, the petitioners and respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits, dispute has been settled between both the parties.

¶30

The submission of the both parties are placed on record.

¶31

In view of the submission made by both side, the I.A.No.1/2024, is allowed. The parties are allowed to compound the offence.

¶32

Accordingly, this petition is allowed .

¶33

Consequently, the criminal proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.748/2007 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, arising out of Crime No.193/2006 registered by the Devanahalli Police station, is hereby quashed.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

AKV_List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71_CT:SK

Suresh Jain v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Jain 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

Mr Philip William George Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Parthasarathy Sampathkumar Vs Zuri Energy Pvt. Ltd.

Sri Sunil G Vs Police Inspector (S.H.O)

Puran Ram Devasi @ Puranram Vs State of Karnataka by

Vijay Kumar H M Vs State by Parappana

Mr Peter Sanjay Mudartha Vs State of Karnataka