Allowed¶33

P Ramamurthy v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC10 Jan 2025CRL.P/4810/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings; S.341 r/w S.34 IPC; S.482 Cr.P.C.; S.528 BNSS; abuse of process of law; dispute essentially civil in nature; bare reading of complaint does not disclose offence; C.C.No.50011/2015; Crime No.309/2014; Bharathinagar Police; XI Addl. CMM Bengaluru; complainant deceased; S.C.No.569/2015; O.S.No.9527/2014; NC: 2025:KHC:888; Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar; decided 10.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; proceedings in C.C.No.50011/2015 on the file of the XI Addl. CMM, Bengaluru quashed qua the petitioners. ¶33

P Ramamurthy Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:888 CRL.P No. 4810 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4810 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

P RAMAMURTHY S/O LATE PARAMASHIVAM AGED 80 YEARS,

¶8

SHIVAGAMI SUNDARI D/O LATE PARAGUSAM AGED 37 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO 17/1, A MUDALIYAR ROAD, OFF SEPPINGS ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR BANGALORE – 560001 ALSO R/AT NO.11, C STREET, BHARATHI NAGAR, BANGALORE CITY.

¶9

…PETITIONERS

¶10

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH B R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA BHARTHINAGAR POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OFKARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560001

¶14

DR. S.K. GUHAROY S/O LATE SUBIMAL AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO 66, 1^ST ‘A’ MAIN, NAGENAHALLI MAIN ROAD, R T NAGAR BANGALORE - 560032

¶15

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1

¶16

VIDE ORDER DATED 12.06.2024, R2 COMPLAINANT IS NO MORE)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:888 CRL.P No. 4810 of 2023

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.50011/2015 (CR.NO.309/2014) REGISTERED BY BHARATHI NAGAR POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 341 R/W 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XI ADDL.C.M.M BENGALURU.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.50011/2015 on the file of the XI Addl. CMM, Bengaluru for the offence punishable under Section 341 read with Section 34 of IPC and for other reliefs.

¶23

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that deceased respondent No.2 filed the instant complaint against petitioner Nos.1 and 2 for the alleged offence punishable under Section 341 read with Section 34 of IPC. The said complaint was registered as FIR in Crime No.309/2014. In the meanwhile, deceased/respondent No.2 also instituted civil proceedings in S.C.No.569/2015 against the petitioners before Small Causes Court, which was dismissed vide judgment dated 20.04.2018. So also the civil suit in O.S.No.9527/2014 filed by respondent No.2 against the petitioners was also dismissed for non prosecution on

¶24

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:888 CRL.P No. 4810 of 2023

¶26

03.09.2019. It is also relevant to state that respondent No.2complainant expired prior to filing the present petition as can be seen from the police report and Post Mortem Report .

¶27

The aforesaid facts and circumstances and material on record will indicate that except making allegations for the purpose of invoking offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC, even a bare reading of the complaint will not disclose that the said offence has been made out in the complaint and charge sheet. In addition thereto having regard to the fact that the aforesaid civil proceedings instituted by respondent No.2 against the petitioners which have been dismissed, I am of the considered opinion that the dispute between the parties being essentially, predominantly and overwhelmingly of civil nature, continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners would tantamount to abuse of process of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition

¶28