Santosh And Ors vs State And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 5200 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                  KALABURAGI BENCH

    DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                         BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.201637/2021


BETWEEN:

1. SANTOSH
S/O SAHADEVA JAMAGE
AGE: 33 YEARS
OCC: COOLIE WORK
R/O ALANGA, TQ: ALAND
DIST: KALABURAGI

2. SANJAY
S/O HANMANTH DHAGE
AGE: 32 YEARS
OCC: COOLIE WORK
R/O KHAJURI, TA: ALAND
DIST: KALABURAGI

3. BALAJI
S/O SHIVARAM NAGANE
AGE: 36 YEARS
OCC: DRIVER
R/O ALANGA, TA: ALAND
DIST: KALABURAGI
                                      ...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI ASHOK MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
                          2



AND:

1. STATE THROUGH ALAND P.S.
TQ. ALAND, DIST. KALABURAGI
REP. BY ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH

2. KRISHNA
S/O VILAS KAMBLE
AGE: 25 YEARS
OCC: COOLIE
R/O ALANGA, TQ: ALAND
DIST: KALABURAGI
                                     ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M PATIL, HCGP FOR R1
 SRI A.M.NAGRAL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)


 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING THIS COURT TO QUASH THE FIR,
COMPLAINT     AND   ENTIRE    CHARGE    SHEET    IN
CR.NO.13/2017 UNDER SECTION 295, SEC.34 OF IPC OF
ALAND P.S. PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. SESSIONS
JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN SPL. CASE (SC/ST) No.47/2017
AND ETC.


       THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                              3



                        ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and

the learned counsel for the second respondent.

2. The counsel appearing for the petitioners

would submit that the parties have settled the matter and

filed an application under Section 320(1) and (2) read with

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for compounding of offence and the

offence invoked against the petitioners are under Section

295 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of

SC/ST (PA) Act and Section 66(A) of I.T Act.

3. The parties including the complainant and also

the petitioners herein have signed the compromise petition

and their respective counsel are also signed and also filed

an affidavit stating that they have settled the matter

voluntarily without there being any coercion or influence

and on the advise of the well-wishers of both the parties to

maintain good relationship between the parties.

4. The learned High Court Government Pleader

for the State submits that it is an offence against the

particular religion and whatsapp message is sent in the

group.

5. The counsel for the petitioners submits that

though it is alleged that the said whatsapp message is

circulated in the mobile numbers of these petitioners,

nothing is there to show that there is any prima facie

material placed that those mobile numbers are belongs to

these petitioners.

6. Having heard the counsel for the respective

parties and also taking note of the offences alleged against

the petitioners herein and when the complainant himself

come forward to compromise the matter and the offences

alleged against the petitioners are not heinous offences as

held by the Apex Court in the case of GIAN SINGH vs

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported in (2012)

10 SCC 303. The Apex Court held that the serious

offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape,

dacoity, etc., the Court cannot invoke Section 482 of

Cr.P.C. and in the case on hand such situation is not arisen

and the Court also held that before exercise of such

powers, the High Court must have due regard to the

nature and gravity of the crime and its social impact. The

Apex Court also in the case of NARINDER SINGH AND

OTHERS vs STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER reported

in (2014) 6 SCC 466 wherein while exercising the powers

under Sections 482 and 320 of Cr.P.C it is held that if it is

between the private parties and not affecting the society at

large, the Court can invoke Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

7. Having considering the principles laid down in

the judgments referred supra, in the case on hand, the

factual aspects is not comes within the purview of social

impact and affecting the society at large. Hence, I am of

the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise the

powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the

proceedings.

8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass

the following:

ORDER

The application filed under Section 320(1) and (2) of

Cr.P.C. is allowed.

Consequently, the petition filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings initiated against

the petitioners is hereby allowed and quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SAN