Sheila N M Vs Sathyanarayana v Jingade

SATHYANARAYANA V.JINGADE H/O LATE VIMALA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/AT NO.58, 19^TH MAIN 2^ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE - 10. AND ALSO AT NO.56, 2^ND MAIN, 11^TH CROSS MUNESHWARA EXTENSION

¶14

LAGGERE, BANGALORE-560 058.

¶15

M.S.NATH H/O LATE SHAKUNTALA BAI AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:45344 WP No. 15489 of 2014

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

R/AT NO.562, 5^TH BLOCK 1^ST STAGE, 7^TH MAIN HBR LAYOUT, BANGALORE-04.

¶20

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY COMMERCIAL STREET POLICE STATION, BANGALORE.

¶21

[IMPLEADED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 20.08.2015]

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. RAJAT SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP FOR R3;

¶24

SRI. K.S.KALLESHAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 [ABSENT];

¶25

VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 20.08.2015, PETITION AGAINST R1 IS ABATED)

¶26

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF Cr.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH BY DELETING THE NAMES OF SHEILA N.M.[PETITIONER HEREIN]/ACCUSED NO.6 AND OF MY BROTHER VINOD N.M. [ACCUSED NO.7] FROM THE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT OF PCR NO.351/2012 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE COURT OF XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, AT MAYOHALL, BANGALORE VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND ETC.

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:45344 WP No. 15489 of 2014

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

¶34

"a. Pass an order in favour of this Petitioner herein/ Sheila.N.M and my brother Vinod.N.M to quash by deleting the names of Sheila.N.M (Petitioner herein)/ Accused No.6 and of my brother Vinod.N.M/Accused No.7 from the Criminal complaint of PCR.No.351/2012 pending before the Hon'ble Court of XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Mayohall, Bangalore [Vide Annexure-J]

¶35

b. Pass any other order in favour of this Petitioner herein/Sheila.N.M and my brother Vinod.N.M if any other subsequent complaint is filed against us by the Respondents.No.1 and 2 herein/Complainants of PCR.No.351/2012, which is not known to this Petitioner."

¶36

PCR.No.351/2012 was filed by respondent nos.1 and 2/complainants therein alleging that accused nos.1 and 2 therein with an intention to defraud the right of the complainants (respondent nos.1 and 2 herein) have got created a Will to grab the property which is the subject matter of the private complaint. It is alleged that accused nos.1 and 2 therein created a concocted Will of one Smt. Anusuya Bai who also happens to be grandmother of petitioner herein. It is further alleged in the complaint that pursuant to the said creation of forged Will by accused nos.1 and 2, other accused in the complaint have become beneficiaries.

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:45344 WP No. 15489 of 2014

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

The contention of the complainants therein is that they

¶41

were exclusively entitled to the property in question after the demise of Smt. Anusuya Bai. However, accused nos.1 and 2 therein have concocted the Will. The petitioner herein (accused no.6) and accused no.7 had filed O.S.No.27208/2007, a suit for partition claiming rights over the property even when they do not have any right, title or interest over the same and that they have withdrawn the said suit subsequently. It is further alleged that petitioner herein is in illegal joint possession of the property concerned along with other persons and this amounts to an offence.

¶42

4. The allegations made against the petitioner herein in

¶43

the private complaint are in paragraphs 13 and 14 of the same and it reads as under :

¶44

"13. It is further submitted that the accused No. 6 and 7 have filed a suit before the City Civil Judge at Bangalore in O.S.No.27208/2007 seeking a relief for partition and separate possession and such other reliefs, and they have obtained an ex party temporary injunction, with respect of the above said property. In this suit the complainants, the other legal heirs of the late. Ramachandra Rao and Late. Anusuya Bai and accused No. 1 to 5 are the plaintiffs and defendants, the HSBC Bank also a party in the

¶45

5 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:45344 WP No. 15489 of 2014

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

above said suit. In the said suit the complainants and HSBC Bank have received the summons in the above said suit thereafter they have filed a vakalat and statement of objections. Thereafter the complainant have also submitted that they have no objection to allow the suit filed by the accused No. 6 and 7 before the Hon'ble City Civil Judge at Bangalore. But the accused No. 6 and 7 have not agreed to allow the suit filed by them.

¶49

14. It is further submitted that thereafter the accused No. 6 and 7 have filed a memo for withdrawal of the suit filed by them. Accordingly the Hon'ble court was pleased to allow the memo and dismissed the suit as per the memo. The copy of the petition and order sheet are produced herewith for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court."

¶50

5. Apart from the aforementioned allegations, there are

¶51

no allegations made against the petitioner herein.

¶52

However, a prayer is made to initiate prosecution and punish all the accused therein including the petitioner herein for the offences under Sections 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶53

This Court on 06.06.2014 has passed the following

¶54

order:

¶55

"Issue notice to Respondents returnable in two weeks.

¶56

6 -

¶57

NC: 2025:KHC:45344 WP No. 15489 of 2014

¶58

HC-KAR

¶59

Proceedings in PCR.No.351/2002 on the file of XI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, are stayed in so far as it pertains to accused Nos.6 and 7. The petitioner herein is 6^th accused and 7^th accused is her brother."

¶60

A reading of the private complaint discloses that the dispute between the complainants and the accused therein is essentially civil in nature and if at all any criminal act is alleged against any person, it is only against accused nos.1 and 2 therein, who are said to have allegedly concocted and forged a Will of late Smt.Anusuya Bai. Even if all the allegations made in the complaint are believed to be true, there are no specific allegations of any criminal act alleged against the petitioner herein and she cannot be punished for any of the offences as prayed for in the private complaint.

¶61

It is submitted that respondent no.1 has died. Taking note of the said fact, this Court by its order dated 20.08.2015 has passed the following Order:

¶62

"Sri. K.S.Kalleshappa, learned advocate submitted that respondent no.1 died on 15.08.2015 and hence, he cannot appear in the matter. Petitioner, party-in-person does not dispute the statement made by Sri.K.S.Kalleshappa. As

¶63

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:45344 WP No. 15489 of 2014

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

a consequence, the petition as against the said respondent is abated.

¶66

Respondent no.2 is served and un-represented.

¶67

List on 15.09.2015.

¶68

Learned Additional SPP to ascertain from the Police,

¶69

the stage of investigation in the impugned matter.

¶70

Since the FIR registered by the police is under challenge, State represented by Commercial Street Police Station, Bengaluru, is directed to be impleaded as respondent no.3. Amendment of cause-title forthwith.

¶71

Learned Additional SPP is directed to accept notice on whom, a copy of this petition and the interlocutory applications, if any filed be served."

¶72

Respondent no.2 though served has remained

¶73

unrepresented.

¶74

Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent no.3 upon instructions submits, there is no material against the petitioner herein and the proceedings in PCR.No.315/2012 insofar as it relates to the petitioner herein be quashed.

¶75