Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

David Benners vs Mr Kannan Ramamani on 12 December, 2022

                                                -1-
                                                        CRL.P No. 7175 of 2017




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

                                             BEFORE
                               THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
                             CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7175 OF 2017
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    DAVID BENNERS
                         AGED ABOUT MAJOR
                         SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
                         NTT DATA , INC.
                         5601 GRANITE PARKWAY
                         SUITE 1000, PLANO, TX 75024.

                   2.    DEAN WILLIAMS
Digitally signed
by V
                         AGED ABOUT MAJOR
MANJUSHA BAI             EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,
Location: High
Court of                 HUMAN CAPITAL, NTT DATA, INC.
Karnataka
                         100 CITY SQUARE BOSTON, MA 02129.

                                                               ...PETITIONERS

                   (BY SRI ABHISHEK K., ADVOCATE FOR
                   SRI ADHITYA DIWAKAR, ADVOCATE)


                   AND:

                   1.    MR. KANNAN RAMAMANI
                         S/O. RAMAMANI SHANKARA IYER
                         AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
                         A601, SKYLINE RK ATLANTIS
                         PAI LAYOUT, BENNIGANAHALLI
                         BENGALURU - 560 016.
                                                               ...RESPONDENT
                   (BY SRI RAJENDRA DESAI, ADVOCATE, (ABSENT))
                                     -2-
                                                CRL.P No. 7175 of 2017




     THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO
QUASH THE COMPLAINT IN PCR.NO.3149/2016 PENDING ON
THE FILES OF THE VIII ACMM., BENGALURU, FOR THE
OFFENCES P/U/S.120B, 341 AND 506 R/W 34 OF IPC., FOUND
AT ANNEXURE-A.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH
PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                                ORDER

Aggrieved by the initiation of PCR No.3149/2016 before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, the accused Nos.2 and 3 therein have filed this petition.

2. The respondent is the complainant in the said PCR. He has stated that he was an employee of NTT Data, Inc. and accused Nos.2 and 3 along with accused No.1 were his superiors. Accused No.2 / petitioner No.1 called the complainant / respondent to JW Marriott Hotel on 13.11.2015 at about 9.30 a.m. and ushered him to a room where petitioner No.1 along with accused No.1 were seated and accused No.3 joined him over telephone and they forced him to resign from the post he held and they threatened if he did not resign, he would be terminated from the employment with dire -3- CRL.P No. 7175 of 2017 consequences. On the ground that the actions of the accused wrongfully restrained him, he has lodged PCR wherein, he has prayed action to be initiated against them under Sections 341, 506 and 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC.

3. Inspite of being represented, learned Advocate for the respondent is absent.

4. Reading of the complaint reveals that the respondent was called to JW Marriott Hotel restaurant at 9.30 a.m. on 13.11.2015. When he reached the place, he was taken to a room. Wherein accused No.1 and accused No.2 i.e., petitioner No.1 herein were present and accused No.3 i.e., petitioner No.2 herein joined the discussion over telephone and all the accused asked him to resign, failing which his services would be terminated with dire consequences. There is no mention of him being physically restrained from moving around the room or going out of the room. The entire allegations discloses that the respondent was asked to resign and he has resigned from the job. There are no specific allegations as to how the offences alleged under Sections 341 and 506 of IPC -4- CRL.P No. 7175 of 2017 has been committed by any of the accused. It is further submitted that during the course of argument that respondent filed a suit for damages against the petitioners by way of O.S.No.1972/2016, which came to be withdrawn on 20.09.2021. The said fact clearly establish that the dispute between the petitioners and the respondent is one of civil in nature, which the respondent has tried to give a criminal colour.

5. Under the circumstances, the petition is allowed. The proceedings in PCR No.3149/2016 on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, against the petitioners herein (accused Nos.2 and 3) is hereby quashed.

In view of disposal of the main petition, interlocutory applications, if any do not survive for consideration and the same are hereby disposed of.

SD/-

JUDGE VMB