State Of Karnataka vs Sri.C.Mruthyunjayaswamy
2023 Latest Caselaw 6031 Kant

                                         -1-
                                                       NC: 2023:KHC:30839
                                                    CRL.A No. 950 of 2017




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

                                       BEFORE

                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

                        CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 950 OF 2017 (A)

              BETWEEN:

                    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                    REPRESENTED BY
                    THE POLICE INSPECTOR
                    KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA
                    POLICE WING, CITY DIVISION
                    M S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
                    BENGALURU - 560 001.

                                                             ...APPELLANT
              (BY SRI. VENKATESH S ARBATTI, SPL. PP)


              AND:
Digitally
signed by N
UMA
Location:
              1.    SRI.C.MRUTHYUNJAYASWAMY
HIGH                SON OF SRI LATE CHANNAPPA SHASTRE
COURT OF
KARNATAKA           AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
                    RESIDING AT NO.401, VAISHANAVI SPRINGS
                    M RANGA RAO ROAD, SHANKARAPURA
                    BANGALORE - 560 004.

              2.    DR (SMT) H M HEMA
                    WIFE OF SRI C MRUTHYUNJAYASWAMY
                    AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
                    RESIDING AT NO.401, VAISHANAVI SPRINGS
                    M RANGA RAO ROAD, SHANKARAPURA
                             -2-
                                      NC: 2023:KHC:30839
                                   CRL.A No. 950 of 2017




     BANGALORE - 560 004.

3.   SMT SOWBHAGYAMMA
     WIFE OF SRI LATE H R MUDDAVEERA SHETTY
     AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
     RESIDING AT NO.7, 2ND FLOOR
     2ND MAIN, MUNESHWARA BLOCK
     PADMANABHANAGAR POST
     BANGALORE - 560 070.

4.   SRI H M PRABHU
     SON OF SRI LATE H R MUDDAVEERA SHETTY
     AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
     RESIDING AT NO.7, 2ND FLOOR
     2ND MAIN, MUNESHWARA BLOCK
     PADMANABHANAGAR POST
     BANGALORE - 560 070.

                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHANDAN B K, ADVOCATE FOR
   SMT. SHRUTI CHAGANTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
   R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
   V/O DATED 08/01/2019 NOTICE TO
   R3 AND R4 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

      THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S.454 CR.P.C PRAYING THAT TO

SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.02.2017 PASSED BY THE

77TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS/SPECIAL JUDGE,

BANGALORE IN CRIME.NO. 28/2011 AND ETC.,



      THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                               -3-
                                             NC: 2023:KHC:30839
                                          CRL.A No. 950 of 2017




                         JUDGMENT

1. Heard Shri Venkatesh S.Arbatti, learned Special

Public Prosecutor for the appellant / State and learned counsel

Shri Chandan B.K. for Smt.Shruti Chaganti, learned counsel for

the respondent No.1.

2. This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant /

State, seeking to set aside the order dated 04.02.2017 passed

by the LXXVII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and

Special Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-78) in Crime No.28/2011.

3. It is the case of the appellant that, a case was

registered against the respondents / accused for the offences

under Sections 13(1)(e) r/w 13(2) of the Prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 (for short 'PC Act'). The respondent Nos.1

to 4 / accused No.1 to 4 filed Writ Petition No.21782/2014,

Writ Petition No.38450/2014, Writ Petition No.38451/2014 and

Writ Petition No.38498/2014 respectively, questioning the

entire proceedings before this Court. This Court allowed the

writ petitions and quashed the proceedings. Pursuant to the

NC: 2023:KHC:30839 CRL.A No. 950 of 2017

order of quashing of FIR, the respondents filed applications

under Section 452 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short

'Cr.P.C.') seeking for defreezing their bank accounts and also

for return of the seized articles. The said applications were

allowed and bank accounts of the respondents were ordered to

be defreezed and the articles were handed over to the

respondents on receiving the indemnity bonds. Being

aggrieved by the order of quashing the entire proceedings, the

appellant herein had preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme

Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the SLP and

remitted the matter for investigation. In the meantime, the

appellant herein preferred this appeal against the order of

allowing the applications filed under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. The

Investigating Officer, after conducting the investigation, wrote

a letter to the concerned Authority for sanction to file the

charge sheet, the same was rejected. Being aggrieved by the

same, the appellant preferred a petition before this Court, the

same was dismissed. The said order has not been challenged

and has attained finality.

NC: 2023:KHC:30839 CRL.A No. 950 of 2017

4. Considering the overall proceedings of the case, it is

construed that, the prayer of the appellant has become

infructuous. Therefore, it is appropriate to dismiss the appeal

as having become infructuous. Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BSS