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 11, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Baburao And Ors vs The State And Anr on 25 September, 2024

Author: K Natarajan

Bench: K Natarajan

                                               -1-
                                                             NC: 2024:KHC-K:7348
                                                     CRL.P No. 200187 of 2024




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                      KALABURAGI BENCH

                        DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

                                            BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN

                           CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200187 OF 2024
                                   (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   BABURAO
                        S/O GENUBA JADHAV,
                        AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
                        OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                        RESIDENCE OF TADAVALAGA,
                        NEAR JOD GUDI, TOTAD VASATI,
                        TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.

                   2.   PARAVATI
                        W/O BABURAO JADHAV,
                        AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                        OCC: H.H. WORK AND AGRICULTURE,
Digitally signed        RESIDENCE OF TADAVALAGA,
by KHAJAAMEEN
L MALAGHAN              NEAR JOD GUDI, TOTAD VASATI,
Location: High          TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYPURA-586101.
Court Of
Karnataka
                   3.   MINAKSHI
                        W/O SANGRAM SHIRSE,
                        AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                        OCC: ADVOCATE,
                        RESIDENCE OF TADAVALAGA,
                        NEAR JOD GUDI, TOTAD VASATI,
                        TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.

                   4.   POOJA
                        D/O BABURAO JADHAV,
                        AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
                             -2-
                                          NC: 2024:KHC-K:7348
                                  CRL.P No. 200187 of 2024




     OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK,
     RESIDENCE OF NAGAR BUDI,
     KALKAI KONDA,
     TQ. DAPOLI, DIST. RATNAGIRI-415712,
     (STATE OF MAHARASHTRA)
                                               ...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. REKHA PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR
 SRI. G. G. CHAGASHETTI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   THE STATE THROUGH,
     HORTI P.S., INDI TALUKA,
     DIST. VIJAYAPUR
     REPRESENTED BY,
     THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
     HIGH COURT BUILDING,
     KALABURAGI-585102.

2.   ARJUN S/O LIMBAJI JADHAV,
     AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
     OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O TADAVALAGA, JOD GUDI,
     TOTAD VASATI,
     TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586101.
                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ANITA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R1;
 NOTICE TO R-2 SERVED BUT, UN-REPRESENTED)

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND
TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS/ CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.
NO. 3680/2023 (CRIME NO. 111/2022) REGISTERED BY THE
HORTI P.S VIJAYAPURA FOR THE OFFENCE UNDER SECTIONS
109, 323, 504, 355 READ WITH 34 OF IPC, PENDING FILE OF
ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC INDI, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

    THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:    HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN
                              -3-
                                          NC: 2024:KHC-K:7348
                                    CRL.P No. 200187 of 2024




                        ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN) This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 for quashing the criminal proceedings in CC No.3680/2023 arising out of Crime No.111/2022 registered by, Horti Police Station, Vijayapura district and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 323, 504, 355 read with Section 34 of IPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and High Court Government Pleader for the State. Respondent No.2 served and remained unrepresented.

3. The case of the prosecution is that respondent No.2 filed the complaint on 06.10.2022 alleging that on 02.10.2022, the petitioners came to their land, abused him and his family members in filthy language and assaulted them with hands. Thereafter, the people of the village came and rescued them. Hence, the complaint came to be filed. The police registered the FIR in Crime -4- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7348 CRL.P No. 200187 of 2024 No.111/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 323, 504, 355 read with Section 34 of IPC and also filed the charge sheet, which is under challenge.

4. The learner counsel for the petitioners submits there is a civil case register between the petitioners and respondent No.2 in OS No. 284/2022 and the judgment was delivered against the respondent No.2. Hence, a complaint was filed by the respondent No.2 in Crime No. 111/2022 against the petitioners herein on 06.10.2022, which is as a counterblast complaint to the complaint filed by the petitioner No.2 in Crime No.109/2022. Hence, he prayed for allowing the petition and quashing the criminal proceedings.

5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader seriously objected the petition.

6. A careful perusal of the records, reveals that of course, there is a civil dispute pending between the parties, where the first petitioner Baburao filed a suit against the respondent No.2 and obtained the permanent -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7348 CRL.P No. 200187 of 2024 injunction in a declaration suit. The judgment was delivered on 17.01.2023. Of course, there was a quarrel held between the parties, the petitioner No.2 filed a complaint on 03.10.2022 itself and it was registered against the respondent No.2 for aforesaid offences in Crime No. 109/2022. Later, another complaint was filed by respondent No.2 against the petitioners in Crime No.111/2022 on 06.10.2022. Of course, this is a counter blast to the complaint filed by the first petitioner. Normally, this Court never used to interfere in the case of case and counter cases registered against both the groups, until any false complaint has been filed. In this case, there is a delay of four days in filing the complaint. That apart the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 355 of IPC are all non cognizable offences and Section 109 of IPC is also non cognizable offence, if the other offences are non cognizable and cognizable if the other offences are cognizable. Therefore, in this case Section 109 IPC is also a non cognizance offence, where the police cannot register the FIR without permission of -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:7348 CRL.P No. 200187 of 2024 the learned Magistrate under section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Therefore, registering the FIR and filing the charge sheet, is nothing but abuse of process of law and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER i Petition is allowed.
ii. Criminal proceedings against the petitioners in CC No.3680/2023 arising out of Crime No.111/2022 registered by, Horti Police Station, Vijayapura district and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 323, 504, 355 read with Section 34 of IPC is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
(K NATARAJAN) JUDGE NJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34