Sri N Nagaraju vs The State By Sub Inspector Of ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9552 Kant

                               1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

            DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                           BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

            WRIT PETITION No.4062 OF 2022 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI N.NAGARAJU
S/O LATE NARASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
RESIDING AT 14/125
"MATHRUSHREE NILAYA"
3RD MAIN, GANDHINAGAR
YELAHANKA OLD TOWN
BENGALURU - 560 064
                                               ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SATISH K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE STATE BY
       SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
       NELAMANGALA POLICE STATION,
       BENGALURU - 562 123.

2.     SRI L.DORESWAMY
       S/O LATE LINGAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
       RESIDING AT NO.4/1
       17TH CROSS, WEST PARK ROAD
       MALLESWARAM
       BENGALURU - 560 055.
                                             ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1;
    R2-SERVED)
                                  2



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.,
PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE R-1; QUASH THE
IMPUGNED COMPLAINT DTD.18.8.2017 GIVEN BY THE R-2
ANNEXURE-F AND IMPUGNED FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN
CRIME NO.201/2017 DTD.18.8.2017 REGISTERED BY THE R-1
ANNEXURE-G IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED
ACCUSED NO.2.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                                ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following

prayer:

"a) CALL for records from the Respondent No.1;

b) ISSUE WRIT OR ORDER QUASHING the impugned Complaint dated 18/08/2017 given by the 2nd Respondent (Annexure - F) and impugned First Information Report in Crime No.201/2017 dated 18/08/2017 registered by the 1st Respondent (Annexure - G), in so far as the Petitioner is conderned (Accused No.2), in the interest of justice and equity;

c) PASS any other Order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

2. Heard Sri.Satish.K., learned counsel appearing for

petitioner and Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court

Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

High Court Government Pleader would in unison submit that

the issue in the writ petition stands covered by the judgment

rendered by this Court in W.P.No.38083/2017, disposed on

22.12.2021, wherein this Court has held as follows:

"3. Brief facts leading to the filing of this petition as borne out from the pleadings are as under:

The petitioner is alleged to have facilitated sale of certain sites in an alleged illegal layout as narrated by the complainant in the complaint. The subject complaint is registered on 18.08.2017 by the second respondent- complainant. The subject matter of complaint is, lands in Sy.Nos.54/1A, 54/3A and 54/2B measuring 6 acres 11 guntas, in which, a layout in the name and style of 'Arugraha' is established wherein 78 sites were sold and the further allegation is, the sites were sold on the basis of forged Forms No.9 and 11 which were the necessary documents then for registration of a sale deed. On the very same facts of the alleged illegal layout and the alleged sale, the Panchayat Development Officer (PDO) of Manne Grama Panchayat under whose precincts the said layout exists had registered a case in Crime No.98/2017. The said complaint was registered on 21.07.2017.

4. The Police after investigating in to the offences alleged in the said complaint which were the ones punishable under Sections 419, 420, 417 and 34 of IPC filed 'B' Summary Report on 20.06.2018. The said 'B' Summary Report after following due process is accepted by the competent court and the criminal case in Crime No.98/2017 is closed by the order of the competent court on 08.04.2019.

5. At around the same time, when the PDO had filed the criminal complaint, a month after the first complaint, the second respondent complainant, who was the Ex-President of the Grama Panchayat files another complaint alleging the very same offences that were alleged in the complaint filed by the PDO. The added allegation is for offence punishalbe under Section 120B in the second complaint filed on the same set of facts by the second respondent.

6. It is not in dispute that the subject matter of both the complaints was the same on sale of 78 sites in the very same survey number on the strength of forged Forms No.9 and 11.

The Police having investigated into the alleged offence and filing 'B' Summary Report and the said 'B' Summary Report being accepted by the competent court are not in dispute and the proceedings which the PDO had initiated ended in filing of 'B' Summary Report. The issue is, "Whether the impugned proceedings would be hit by the doctrine of sameness or the fact that the 'B' Summary Report being filed in an identical complaint alleging identical offence is what is to be answered in the case at hand?"

7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. On a complaint registered on the same set of facts, the Panchayath Development Officer had filed a complaint invoking Section 200 of Cr.P.C., against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420 and 417 and 34 of IPC. The police after investigation have filed a 'B' Summary report, which is accepted and proceedings are closed by the competent criminal Court.

8. On the same set of facts, at the same time, the former President of the Gram Panchayath had also filed a complaint for the very same offences. The other offence is

Section 120B. Since both the complaints emanated from the same set of facts and the very same allegations against the petitioner, one having ended in a 'B' report, the other filed by the former President of the Gram Panchayath on the same ground would lose its legs to stand, on the ground of sameness, in the complaint and the allegations leveled against the petitioner.

9. The issue also stands covered by the judgment of this Court in Crl.P.No.3171/2018 disposed on 20.09.2021.

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

i) The writ petition is allowed.

ii) The impugned proceedings in Crime No.201/2017 pending before Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Court, Nelamangala, Bengaluru Stands quashed qua the petitioner."

5. In the light of the reasons rendered while disposing the

aforesaid petition which covers the case on hand on all its fours,

I deem it appropriate to obliterate the proceedings pending

against the petitioner.

6. For the afore-said reasons, the following:

ORDER

(i) Writ Petition is allowed.

(ii) The impugned proceedings in Crime No.201/2017

pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC,

Nelamangala, Bengaluru stand quashed qua the

petitioner.

Sd/-

JUDGE

bkp CT:MJ