Disposed

Sri Saleem Sheriff v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Dec 2024WP/3174/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 226 and Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR and complaint under IPC offences. The court observed that a settlement memo was filed by the parties and directed the quashing of the proceedings and defreezing of petitioners' accounts.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed. Proceedings in Crime No.210/2020 and complaint stands quashed qua petitioners. Directing Investigating Officer to defreeze accounts.

Sri Saleem Sheriff Vs State of Karnataka — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:49974 WP No. 3174 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 3174 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. SALEEM SHERIFF, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, 32/21, SKYLARK CHAMBERS, YELLAPPA CHETTY LAYOUT,

¶8

ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 042.

¶9

SRI. OMAR SHERIFF, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 32/21, SKYLARK CHAMBERS, YELLAPPA CHETTY LAYOUT, ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 042.

¶10

Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI. SHORAB SHERIFF, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, 32/21, SKYLARK CHAMBERS, YELLAPPA CHETTY LAYOUT,

¶12

ULSOOR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 042.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. ABHIMANYU ARJUN DEVAIAH T., ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KADUGODI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE - 560 067, KARNATAKA.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:49974 WP No. 3174 of 2023

¶19

BHASKAR DAS,

¶20

61 YEARS, NO.136, 2ND FLOOR, 3RD CROSS, SAKET NAGARA HOODI, BENGALURU - 560 048, KARNATAKA.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI. MAHESH CHOUDHARY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶23

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED FIR NO. 210/2020 VIDE ANENXURE-A FOR OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 34, 120B, 406, 418 AND SECTION 420 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 DATED 02/10/2022 AND COMPLAINT DATED 26/09/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-A1 REGISTERED AT KADUGODI POLICE STATION, WHITEFIELD SUB DIVISION PENDING BEFORE THE ADDL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU AS BEING ILLEGAL, ERRONEOUS, ARBITRARY AND BAD IN THE EYES OF LAW AND ETC.,

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Heard Sri. Abhimanyu Arun Devaiah T., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Addl.SPP appearing for respondent No.1, Sri. Mahesh

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:49974 WP No. 3174 of 2023

¶30

Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and have perused the material on record.

¶31

During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties to the lis have settled the dispute among themselves and have filed a joint memo. The joint memo reads as follows:

¶32

" JOINT MEMO FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND ACCUSED

¶33

The parties above named humbly submits as follows:

¶34

The Respondent No.2had filed Complaint offences under Sections 34, 120B, 406, 418 and 420of Indian penal Code, 1860 against the Petitioner. Subsequently, the complaint was registered as a FIR bearing No 0210/2020 dated 02.10.2020before Kadugodi Police Station for offences under Sections 34, 120B, 406, 418 and 420 of Indian penal Code, 1860 arraying the Petitioners as the accused.

¶35

However, on 07.03.2024 MOU was entered into between The Homebuyers of Project Skylark Ithasca and M/s Ramkey Estates and Farm Limited and M/s Skylark Mansions Private Limited and M/s Ithaca Estates Private Limited and the Petitioners along with MrsNishaat Saleem. As per the MOU, a settlement has been entered into between these parties, The Respondent No.2 has consented that they will withdraw the pending suits and complaints in light of the taking over of construction by M/s Romkey Estates and Farm Limited.

¶36

This implies that the Respondent No.2 intends to not pursue the impugned complaint and FIR dated 02.10.2020.

¶37

WHEREFORE , it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to take this Joint Memo on record. In view of the compromise/settlement quash the complaint and FIR bearing No 0210/2020 dated 02.10.2020 pending

¶38

¶39

NC: 2024:KHC:49974 WP No. 3174 of 2023

¶40

on the file of Addi Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, Rural Districtin the interest of justice and equity"

¶41

In the light of the settlement of the dispute between the parties, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that on account of the registration of the crime, accounts of the petitioners were frozen by the order of the Investigating Officer.

¶42

In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties and closure of the proceedings, I deem it appropriate to direct the Investigating Officer to direct the bank to defreeze the accounts, forthwith.

¶43

In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the offences not being against the State, I deem it appropriate to accept the joint memo and close the proceedings against the petitioners in the subject petition.

¶44

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i. Writ Petition is disposed.

¶47

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:49974 WP No. 3174 of 2023

¶48

ii. Proceedings in Crime No.210/2020 and complaint dated 02.10.2020, stands quashed qua the petitioners.

¶49

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶50

SJK List No.: 4 Sl No.: 14 CT: BHK

Sri Saleem Sheriff v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Saleem Sheriff 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

Sri Chandru M Vs the State by Yelahanka Police

Mr. Hassan Shareef Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Satish Vaishnav Vs State of Karnataka

Ashfaq Ahmed Khan Soori Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Saleem Sheriff Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Saleem Sheriff Vs State of Karnataka