Karnataka High Court
Pavan Kumar N R vs State Of Karnataka on 8 June, 2022
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5337 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
1. PAVAN KUMAR N.R.,
S/O RAMAREDDY N.T.,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT UJJINI MATTA ROAD
NEAR RANGAIAHNA BAGILU
CHITRADURGA - 560 075.
2. V.T.ARUN KUMAR
S/O V.M.THIPPE SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT NO. 069, J.N.KATE
NERANAHALA, JAMPANNAIKKANAKOTE
CHITRADURGA - 577 532.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI S.RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY TURUVANUR
REPRESENTED BY
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 066.
2
2. MALLIKARJUNA
S/O KENDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT KASAVANAHALLI
KSRTC LAYOUT
CHITRADURGA TOWN
CHITRADURGA - 577 531.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI V.VINOD REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN
CR.NO.77/2019 OF TURUVENUR POLICE STATION, ON THE FILE
OF THE 3rd ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT AT
CHITRADURGA, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 506(2), 504, 323, 324
R/W SEC.34 OF IPC 1860.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question
proceedings in C.C.No.3199/2019, pending before the II
Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga, for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506(2) and 34 of IPC,
arising out of crime No.77/2019.
2. Heard S. Rajashekar, learned counsel for
the petitioners, Smt. K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.1, Sri V. Vinod Reddy,
learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The facts in brief as projected by the prosecution are as
follows:
On 26.09.2019, an alleged incident of assault happens,
which results in two complaints being registered, one by the
petitioner against the complainant and the another by the
complainant against the petitioner. The first petitioner is the
brother of the wife of the complainant. The parties to the lis are
in a proceeding instituted by the wife against the husband in
Crime No.7/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections
498A, 504, 506 and 323 of the IPC. The petitioner appears as a
witness along with his sister tendering evidence in her favour.
Investigation in crime No.7/2017 has resulted in a charge sheet
being filed by the police after investigation. On the ground that
the petitioners have appeared as witnesses in crime No.7/2017,
the impugned complaint is registered by the husband against
the petitioners in crime No.77/2019 alleging offences punishable
under Sections 506, 504, 323, 324 and 34 of the IPC.
4. A perusal at the complaint would clearly indicate that
the second respondent - husband is wanting to settle scores
with the petitioners for having supported the wife in a
proceeding instituted against him in crime No.7/2017 for the
offences punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 506 and 323 of
the IPC. No other inference can be drawn for the registration of
the alleged complaint. Yet another circumstance which would
depict it would be a counter blast is, petitioner No.1 registers
another crime in crime No.76/2019 for the very same offences
on an alleged incident that happened on 26.09.2019, the crime
is registered at 11.30 a.m. and immediately thereafter, the
husband registers the crime. Crime Nos.76/2019 and 77/2019
are based on the background of the wife registering a crime
against the husband in crime No.7/2017 for offences punishable
under Sections 498A, 504, 506 and 323 of the IPC.
5. Therefore, finding no allegation that could become an
offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC, I deem it
appropriate to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. to obliterate the crime registered only for wrecking of
vengeance of the kind that is challenged in the case at hand. If
the proceedings are permitted to continue, it would fall foul of
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of VARALA
BHARATH KUMAR V. STATE OF TELANGANA reported in
(2017) 9 SCC 413, has held as follows:
"6. It is by now well settled that the extraordinary
power under Article 226 or inherent power under Section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised
by the High Court, either to prevent abuse of process of
the court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Where
allegations made in the first information report/the
complaint or the outcome of investigation as found in the
charge-sheet, even if they are taken at their face value
and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie
constitute any offence or make out the case against the
accused; where the allegations do not disclose the
ingredients of the offence alleged; where the
uncontroverted allegations made in the first information
report or complaint and the material collected in support
of the same do not disclose the commission of offence
alleged and make out a case against the accused; where
a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with
mala fide and/or where the proceeding is
maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a
view to spite him due to private and personal
grudge, the power under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India or under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure may be exercised."
(Emphasis supplied)
In the light of the facts obtaining in the case at hand and
the judgment of the Apex Court as afore-extracted, I deem it
appropriate to terminate the proceedings qua the petitioners.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.3199/2019, pending
before the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC,
Chitradurga, arising out of crime No.77/2019 stand
quashed, qua the petitioners.
I.A.No.1/2020 is disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/-
JUDGE
nvj
CT:MJ
