Karnataka High Court
Ramu S/O Shekhappa Gollar vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 November, 2021
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE M.G.UMA
CRL.P NO.101982/2021
BETWEEN
1. RAMU S/O SHEKHAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 23 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
2. RAMAPPA S/O MALLAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 44 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
3. AJJAPPA S/O FAKKERAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 65 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
4. BASAVARAJ S/O FAKKERAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 36 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
-2-
5. TIMMANNA S/O MALLAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 36 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
6. SOMU S/O HUSENAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 23 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
7. BASAVARAJ S/O TIMMANNA GOLLAR
AGE 55 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
8. SHEKAPPA S/O SUNKAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 45 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
9. RUDRAPPA S/O FAKKERAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 42 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
10 . AMMANNI S/O HUSENAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 60 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
-3-
11 . FAKKERAPPA S/O HUSENAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 65 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
12 . CHINNAPPA S/O HUSENAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 47 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
13 . HANUMANTAPPA S/O FAKKERAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 61 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
14 . SHAMBHANNA S/O AJJAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 44 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
15 . SMT. RENAVVA W/O SHEKAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 42 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
16 . SMT. LALITAVVA W/O CHINNAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 60 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
-4-
17 . SMT. KUSUMAVVA W/O SOMAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 40 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
18 . SMT. CHINNAVVA W/O RAMAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 42 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
19 . SMT. SHANTAMMA W/O NAGAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 40 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
20 . SMT. RINDAVVA W/O MALLAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 47 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
21 . SMT. PREMAVVA W/O FAKKEERAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 47 YEARS,
OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
22 . SMT. HULIGEMMA W/O RUDRAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 40 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL,
DT. HAVERI-581104.
-5-
23 . SMT. AKKAMMA W/O RUDRAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 35 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL, DT. HAVERI-581104.
24 . SMT. GANGAVVA W/O NAGAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 35 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL, DT. HAVERI-581104.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV.)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH HANGAL POLICE
REP. BY ITS ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD - 580011.
2. SMT. RENUKA W/O LATE PUTTAPPA GOLLAR
AGE 37 YEARS, OCC.
R/O HIRUR GOLLAR BIDAAR,
TQ. HANGAL, DT. HAVERI-581104.
RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.PRAVEEN K.UPPAR, HCGP FOR R1,
SRI.R.H.ANGADI, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT IN PC NO.43/2019, VIDE
DOCUMENT NO.1, FIR REGISTERED IN CR.NO.82/2019 VIDE
DOCUMENT NO.2 AND, CHARGE SHEET BEARING NO.91/2020 DATED
08.11.2020 FILED BY HANGAL POLICE IN CR.NO.82/2019 (CC
NO.1208/2021 VIDE DOCUMENT NO.3 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH
THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN
C.C.NO.1208/2021 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
AT HANGAL FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 143, 147, 149, 306
OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-6-
ORDER
Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 24 in PCR No.43/2019 filed by respondent No.2 alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 306, 504 r/w 149 of IPC, which is now pending in C.C.No.1208/2021 before the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hangal.
2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 filed private complaint against accused Nos.1 to 24 stating that accused Nos.2 to 6 having insisted one Fakkiravva Y.Gollar to give away the land left behind by his father for the purpose of construction of Marikamba Temple. The said Fakkiravva refused to part with the land by stating that a civil suit is pending before the civil court at Hangal in O.S.No.282/2018 and after disposal of the said suit, she will consider the request for giving the land for construction to the temple. Accused Nos.2 to 6 convened a panchayat and socially outcasted the family members of the complainant, Mallappa C.Gollar, Hanumantappa C.Gollar, Lokappa C.Gollar, Puttappa T.Gollar. It was declared by the -7- members of the said panchayat that family members of any of these families shall not talk with any other general public, they should not visit the houses of any other persons nor they can take part in any function, they cannot purchase items from any shop, nor the can move around the village. If they violate any of these conditions, they have to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-.
3. It is stated that on 07.02.2019, the daughter Asha of the complainant went to the house of one Shambu Gollar to attend a function. The accused being the leaders of the village have gathered and prevented her from attending the function. They also reminded her about the decision taken in the panchayat and abused her by questioning as to who will marry her. After that, they also instigated and abetted to commit suicide. Manju Gollar, Hullesh Gollar and Shivakka Gollar consoled the said Asha and sent her back to the house. She was very much upset even after returning to her house. The complainant advised her not to take such conduct on the part of the accused to heart. But however, on 08.02.2019, Asha committed suicide by hanging only due to the abetment to -8- commit suicide by the accused. Even though the complainant tried to file the complaint with Hangal Police Station, the same was not entertained, as the accused were powerful having political influence. Therefore the complainant filed private complaint to initiate legal action against the accused. The learned Magistrate referred the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and directed the Hangal Police to investigate into the matter and file final report. Accordingly, crime No.82/2019 was registered and the investigation was undertaken. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet is filed citing 32 witnesses in the charge sheet. Now the matter is pending in C.C.No.1208/2021 before the committal court.
4. The accused before the trial court are before this court seeking to quash the criminal complaint and also charge sheet filed against them.
5. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Mahesh Wodeyar for the petitioners and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and the learned counsel Sri.R.H.Angadi for respondent No.2. -9-
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the first information there is reference to only accused Nos.1 to 6 and only at the time of filing the charge sheet, it was filed against accused Nos.1 to 24. There is absolutely no allegation in the complaint against accused Nos.7 to 24. Therefore, the charge sheet and the private complaint are liable to be quashed against accused Nos.7 to 24. Moreover, there is inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. Even though the incident had taken place on 08.02.2019, the private complaint came to be filed on 28.02.2019. There is no explanation for the delay in filing the complaint. Therefore, the entire criminal proceeding is to be quashed against all the accused in the interest of justice. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the petition.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 opposing the petition submits that there are prima facie materials against the petitioners for having committed the offence. The situation under which the complaint came to be filed is to be taken into consideration in appreciating the delay caused in filing the private complaint. The daughter of the
- 10 -
complainant committed suicide on 08.02.2019 and the complainant specifically stated in the private complaint that, even though she made an attempt to file the complaint with the Hangal Police, the same has not been entertained, as the accused were powerful. Under such circumstances, naturally there was delay in filing the complaint and the same cannot be a ground to quash the criminal proceedings.
8. Learned counsel further submitted that even though in the complaint all the details were not given by the complainant, during investigation, several witnesses were enquired and their statements were recorded. They are the eye- witnesses to the incident and their statements were also recorded by the investigating officer. The witnesses have given detailed version of the offence committed by each of the accused and the same cannot be ignored at this stage. Therefore, there is no reason to quash the criminal proceedings. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.
9. Learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 supporting the contention of the learned counsel for respondent
- 11 -
No.2 submits that investigation is already completed and detailed charge sheet is filed. The matter is pending before the committal court. As of now, there are prima facie materials to constitute the offence against the accused. Under such circumstances, the petition is to be dismissed as devoid of merits.
10. Perused the material on record. The point that would arise for my consideration is:
Whether the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners under Sections 143, 147, 148, 306, 504 r/w 149 of IPC is liable to be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.? My answer to the above point is in the 'Negative' for the following:
REASONS
11. Initially the private complaint came to be filed on 28.02.2019 making allegations against accused Nos.1 to 6 and also regarding socially outcasting the complainant and other family members and also the incident that had taken place on 07.02.2019. Admittedly, the complainant was not an eye- witness. She had given her version that her daughter Asha had returned to the house, as she was very much upset and she had
- 12 -
consoled her. In spite of that, she committed suicide on 08.02.2019 by hanging. It is stated that she committed suicide only due to the abetment by the accused. The investigation was undertaken, as the matter was referred to the Hangal Police for investigation. Admittedly, the charge sheet is already filed by the police citing 32 witnesses. C.W.1 is the complainant who lodged the complaint and mother of the deceased, whereas C.Ws.2 and 4 to 22 are cited as eye-witnesses. The statements of these witnesses were recorded by the investigating officer, which are produced before the court. These witnesses have given a detailed version about the incident that had taken place on 07.02.2019 and also regarding the commission of the suicide by the deceased. If all these materials are taken into consideration, it makes out a prima facie case against the accused. I do not find any reason to reject the statements of the witnesses recorded by the investigating officer.
12. Even though it is contended that there is inordinate delay in fling the private complaint, the complaint itself discloses that there was an attempt on the part of the complainant to
- 13 -
lodge the complaint before the police, same was not entertained as the accused were powerful persons. Moreover, the complaint is the mother of the deceased Asha who committed suicide by hanging. Under these circumstances, the delay caused in filing the private complaint cannot be said to be either inordinate or unexplained.
13. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that names of accused Nos.7 to 24 are not mentioned in the private complaint cannot be a ground at this stage to quash the criminal proceedings, since all the above witnesses have referred to the names of these petitioners while giving statements before the investigating officer. The charge sheet materials cannot be ignored while appreciating the contention of the prosecution. It is pertinent to note that the petitioners have approached this court only after filing of the charge sheet and registration of C.C.No.1208/2021. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the charge sheet filed by the investigating officer making out prima facie case cannot be ignored to quash the criminal
- 14 -
proceedings against the petitioners. Hence, I answer the above point in the "Negative" and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The criminal petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE MBS/-