Karnataka High Court
Sangeeta And Ors vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 26 September, 2023
Bench: Venkatesh Naik T
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200810 OF 2023 (482)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SANGEETA
W/O. LATE RAMACHANDRA KUMBAR
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
AGRI R/O. KARACHKHED
TQ. CHINCHOLI,
DIST. KALABURAGI- 585320.
2. SRI. PRAVEEN
S/O. ASHAPPA KUMBAR
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK,
R/O. MINAHABAL TQ. SEDUM
Digitally signed
by SHILPA R DIST. KALABURAGI- 585317.
TENIHALLI
Location: HIGH 3. KUMAR CHETAN
COURT OF
KARNATAKA S/O. LATE RAMACHANDRA KUMBAR
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT
R/O. KARACHKHED TQ. CHINCHOLI
DIST. KALABURAGI- 585320.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. B. BHIMASHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH
UNIVERSITY POLICE STATION KALABURAGI
TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI
REPRESENTED BY
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT UNIT
KALABURAGI- 585104.
2. SMT. PARVATI
W/O. SIDDANNA KUMBAR
AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD
R/O. SHAKTI NAGAR SHAHABAD ROAD
TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI- 585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ANITA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R1
NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FIR, CHARGESHEET AND CONSEQUENT
PROCEEDINGS OF C.C.NO. 17216/2022 (ARISING FROM CRIME
NO. 0035/2022) REGISTERED IN UNIVERSITY POLICE STATION
KALABURAGI FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTION 504, 506, 323, 324, 109, R/W 149 INDIAN
PENAL CODE 1860 PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED III
ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KALABURAGI.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent
No.1 - State.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
2. The petitioners being accused Nos.3 to 5 have
filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to
quash the FIR, charge sheet and further proceedings in
C.C.No.17216/2022 (arising out of Crime No.35/2022 of
University police station, Kalaburagi), registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 323, 324,
109 read with Section 149 of IPC, pending on the file of
the learned III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC,
Kalaburagi.
3. The sum and substance of charge sheet is that,
on 18.02.2022, at about 8.00 a.m., when CW.1 was in the
house, accused No.1 being son and accused No.2 being
daughter-in-law of CW.1 took quarrel with CW.1 and made
criminal intimidation to eliminate her, if she do not leave
the house, hence, CW.1 objected the same, therefore,
accused No.1 assaulted her with his hand on the person of
CW.1, accused No.2 assaulted CW.1 with club on her leg,
hence, CW.4 pacified the quarrel. CW.1 further made
allegation that, accused Nos.3 to 5/pettioners were
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
abetted the commission of offences. Hence, CW.1 lodged
a complaint.
4. The police registered a case in Crime
No.35/2022 for the aforesaid offences. The Investigating
Officer has investigated the mater and filed charge sheet.
Taking exception of the same, the petitioners/accused
Nos.3 to 5 have filed this petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners
contended that, the petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 5 are not
residing with accused Nos.1 and 2, hence, question of
abetting accused Nos.1 and 2 would not arise; there is no
specific allegation against the petitioners; there is a family
dispute between CW.1 and his son (accused No.1)
regarding property. On all these grounds, he prays to
allow the petition.
6. The learned High Court Government Pleader
contended that, the petition filed by the petitioners is not
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
maintainable either in law or on facts, hence, she prayed
to dismiss the petition.
7. Perused the material available on record. The
de-facto complainant has made allegation against accused
Nos.1 and 2 in respect of the alleged offences. The only
allegation against the petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 5 is
that, they have abetted for commission of alleged offences
by accused Nos.1 and 2.
8. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kulwant
Singh @ Kulbansh Singh vs State Of Bihar reported in
CDJ 2007 SC 756, at paragraph No.12 of its judgment,
has held as under:
"12. Section 109 provides that if the act
abetted is committed in consequence of
abetment and there is no provision for the
punishment of such abetment then the offender
is to be punished with the punishment provided
for the original offence. Section 109 applies
even where the abettor is not present. Active
abetment at the time of committing the offence
is covered by Section 109. Act abetted in
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
Section 109 means the specific offence abetted.
Mere help in the preparation for the commission
of an offence which is not ultimately committed
is not abetment within the meaning of Section
l09. "Any offence'' in Section 109 means offence
punishable under the IPC or any Special or Local
law. The abetment of an offence under the
Special or Local law, therefore, is punishable
under Section 109. I.P.C. For constituting
offence of abetment, intentional and active
participation by the abettor is necessary."
9. Whereas, in the instant case, as per the
contents of FIR and statement of CW.4 - Chaya, it appears
that, accused Nos.1 and 2 have assaulted CW.1 and made
criminal intimidation to eliminate her and also intentionally
insulted her. In the complaint or in the statement of
CWs.1 and 4, they have not stated that, at the time of
commission of alleged offences, the petitioners/accused
Nos.3 to 5 were present and they have abetted for
commission of alleged offences by accused Nos.1 and 2.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
10. Even if the nature of allegations are proved, it
may become difficult to establish the case against the
petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 5 and the chances of
conviction against the petitioners appears to be remote
and bleak. Accused Nos.1 and 2 are the permanent
resident of Shakti Nagar, Shahabad Road, Kalaburagi and
petitioner Nos.1 and 3/accused Nos.3 and 5 are the
permanent resident of Karachkhed village, Chincholi taluka
and petitioner No.2/accused No.4 being the resident of
Minahabal village, Sedam taluka. Therefore, there is no
substance in the FIR as well as complaint against the
petitioners, thus, it would be unnecessary to drag the
proceedings against the petitioners and it require to be
quashed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
The petition filed by petitioners under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. is allowed.
The proceedings initiated against the
petitioners/accused Nos.3 to 5 in .C.No.17216/2022
NC: 2023:KHC-K:7712
CRL.P No. 200810 of 2023
(arising out of Crime No.35/2022 of University police
station, Kalaburagi), registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 504, 506, 323, 324, 109 read with Section
149 of IPC, pending on the file of the learned III Additional
Civil Judge and JMFC, Kalaburagi, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SRT
