Karnataka High Court
Sri H K Shivaraj vs State By Nuggehalli Police on 23 March, 2022
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.468/2018
BETWEEN
1. SRI H K SHIVARAJ
S/O SRI KALE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
2. SRI KRISHNEGOWDA
S/O SRI CHIKKEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
PETITIONER NOS.1 AND 2 ARE R/AT
HEBBALALU VILLAGE, NUGGEHALLI HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK-571116
HASSAN DISTRICT
3. SRI JAVAREGOWDA
S/O SRI PUTTEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/A BAANANAKERE VILLAGE,
NUGGEHALLI HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK-571 116
HASSAN DISTRICT
4. SRI NANJUNDASWAMY
S/O SRI ANANTHARAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
R/AT DINDAGUR VILLAGE,
KASABA HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK-571 116
HASSAN DISTRICT
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI VENKATESH R BHAGAT, ADVOCATES)
2
AND
1 . STATE BY NUGGEHALLI POLICE
IN THE HIGH COURT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2 . SRI BASAVARAJU B
S/O SRI VEERABHADRAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
BADDIKERE VILLAGE,
NUGGEHALLI HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK-571 116
HASSAN DISTRICT
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP FOR R1
SRI V NARAYANA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 - ABSENT)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF I
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, HASSAN IN POLICE
CR.NO.150/2017/COURT C.R.NO.337/2017 INSTITUTED BY THE
NUGGEHALLI POLICE AT ANNEXURE-A AS PER COMPLAINT
LODGED BY THE RESPODNENT NO.2 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 465,468,420,506 READ WITH
SECTION 34 OF IPC AND READ WITH SECTION 3(1)(p) SC/ST
(POA) AMENDMENT ACT AS PER ANNEXURE-B RESPECTIVELY
AS ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused
Nos.1 to 4, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing
the criminal proceedings in Crime No.150/2017,
registered by Nuggehalli Police Station, Hassan
District for the offences punishable under Sections
506, 420, 465, 468 read with 34 of IPC and Sections
3(1)(p) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act 2015.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners,
learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and learned
counsel for the respondent No.2 remained absent.
3. The case of the prosecution is that
respondent no.2 registered complaint to the
Nuggehalli Police Station, Tumkur District on
27.09.2019 alleging that accused No.1 in collusion
with accused Nos.2 to 4, got created the agreement in
his name that he has borrowed loan of Rs.1.75 lakhs
and agreed to pay an interest and thereafter filed a
suit in O.S.No.469/2012, he came to know the
accused Nos.1 to 4 had created and forged the
signature and filed false complaint against him
thereby caused they caused atrocities under the said
Act. After registering the FIR the police conducted the
investigation, the same is stayed by this Court and the
petitioner has challenged the same.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner
contended that the civil suit was filed by the petitioner
No.1 against the respondent No.2 for recovery of
money. It was contested in the matter but in order to
avoid the repayment he has filed a false complaint.
Learned counsel submits though the suit came to be
dismissed, subsequently in the appeal the first
appellate court set aside the dismissal of suit and
allowed the appeal by decreeing the suit with a
direction to pay the amount of Rs.2,70,500/-. Such
being the case, the contention of respondent No.2
cannot be acceptable and there is no ingredient
against the provisions of either creating document,
forging or cheating and the complainant does not
arise.
Per contra learned HCGP objected the same.
Upon hearing the arguments and on perusal of
the records, admittedly the complaint came to be filed
based upon the original suit filed by this petitioner
No.1 against respondent No.2, for recovery of money
on the ground that he has paid Rs.1.75 lakh and filed
the suit for recovery. The respondent contended that
the said fake document is created by the petitioner
and other accused persons were joined as witnesses,
in order to cheat the complainant. Though previously
the suit filed by petitioner No.1 came to be dismissed
on 04.09.2017 but in the appeal, first appellate court
allowed the appeal and decreed the suit with a
direction to recover Rs.2,70,500/- with future interest
from respondent No.2. The said judgment of the
appellate court is not being challenged which has
attained finality. The judgment of the first appellate
court was delivered on 06.07.2018. The respondent
counsel also not appeared to controvert this fact for
having allowed the appeal filed by the first
respondent. Once the civil court allowed the suit filed
by the petitioner and given decree in favour of the
petitioner No.1 and based upon the document the
finding of the civil court is binding on the criminal
court, therefore the question of conducting any
investigation on contrary to the finding given by the
civil court is not required. Such being the case the
contention of respondent cannot be acceptable that
the petitioners created the document in his name and
forged the signature. Therefore conducting the
investigation against the petitioners is abuse of
process of law. Therefore the petitioner deserves to
be allowed.
The petition is allowed.
The Criminal proceedings against the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No.150/2017,
registered by Nuggehalli Police Station, Hassan
District for the offences punishable under Sections
506, 420, 465, 468 read with 34 of IPC and Sections
3(1)(p) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Act 2015, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
AKV
