Smt. Shakunthala Vs State of Karnataka

THIS CRL.PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 ON 21.01.2023 IN C.C.NO.4625/2023 ON THE FILE OF XLI A.C.M., AT BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE-A FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 384, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-B.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶24

3 -

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:41834 CRL.P No. 8651 of 2023

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

C.C.No.4625/2023 has been registered and is

¶29

pending on the file of XLI ACMM, Bengaluru (it is submitted that presently the case is being heard by the IX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru) against the petitioners as well as one Kamara Sudarshanachari for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 506 and read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC'). The said case is registered based on the complaint made by respondent No.2 herein. The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C.No.4625/2023 while Kamara Sudarshanachari is accused No.1.

¶30

The case of respondent No.2 is that accused No.1 in C.C.No.4625/2023 clandestinely got photographs taken along with respondent No.2, blackmailed her and extorted money by threatening to show those photographs to the husband of respondent No.2-complainant. Subsequently, accused No.1 sent the photographs to accused Nos.2 and 3, who also blackmailed respondent

¶31

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:41834 CRL.P No. 8651 of 2023

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

No.2-complainant and extorted money from her. Hence, the complainant has lodged a complaint to respondent No.-1-Police, who after investigation have filed a charge sheet in C.C.No.4625/2023.

¶34

The petitioners contend that accused No.1 is the person who has extorted and the plain reading of the complaint as well as the contents of the Police Report does not reveal the offences alleged against the petitioners herein having been committed.

¶35

Per contra , the learned High Court Government Pleader as well as the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that there are specific allegations made against the petitioners herein also concerned, which if accepted as true, justifies the filing of the charge sheet and the petitioners will have to be held guilty of the offences alleged.

¶36

The learned High Court Government Pleader further submits that, based on the complaint of the

¶37

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:41834 CRL.P No. 8651 of 2023

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

complainant, statements of witnesses have been obtained by the police and CW6, who happens to be the friend of the complainant, has deposed that she has witnessed the incident of extortion and it is within her knowledge that the petitioners herein have in fact extorted money from respondent No.2. Similarly, it is submitted that CW4, who is the daughter of respondent No.2 herein is also stated to be a witness to the same and she has also deposed to that effect before the police.

¶40

A perusal of the complaint, charge sheet and the statements of respondent No.2-complainant, CW4 and CW6 reveals that, if the allegations made therein are proved, it establishes the fact that the petitioners herein have demanded and collected money from respondent No.2-complainant by blackmailing her by showing her the photographs taken with accused No.1 and by threatening that they will show the same to the husband of respondent No.2. Hence, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case for trial. If the allegations made against the petitioners are

¶41

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:41834 CRL.P No. 8651 of 2023

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

false, the same can be established during the trial. However, this is not a case warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.PC.

¶44

For the aforementioned reasons, the Criminal

¶45

Petition is hereby dismissed.

¶46

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶47

CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23

Smt. Shakunthala v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shakunthala v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shekar Havanje Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Tamashree Deb Vs Mrs. Saraswathi

Athikulla Sharif Vs State of Karnataka

Shri. Bestin Roay Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Arya Lohith Reddy Vs M/S. Sbms Concrete Pvt. Ltd.

Mohammed Rehaman @ Abdul Rahiman Vs the State of Karnataka by