Karnataka High Court
Smt Vyjayanthimala vs State Of Karnataka on 11 April, 2014
Author: S.N.Satyanarayana
Bench: S.N.Satyanarayana
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2105/2014
BETWEEN :
1. SMT .VYJAYANTHIMALA,
W/O SRI G.T.VELU,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
"AISHWARYA MANSION" NO.43/1A,
9TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE,
INDIRANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560038.
2. SRI G .T.VELU @ VELU REDDY,
S/O GUNDA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
"AISHWARYA MANSION" NO.43/1A,
9TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE,
INDIRANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560038. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI T.P.MUTHANNA, ADV.,)
AND :
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY INDIRANAGAR POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE -560 001.
-2-
2. SRI S. RAJENDRAN,
S/O SRI S.K.SUDARSHAM
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
FLAT NO.502,
"USHAKIRAN APARTMENTS"
NO.25, HAUDIN ROAD,
ULSOOR,
BANGALORE- 560042. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.J.ESWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.22796/12 PENDING ON
THE FILE OF THE X ADDL.C.M.M., BANGALORE, ANNEXURE-
A TO THE PETITIONER.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Accused 1 and 2 in CC.No.22796/2012 pending on the file of X ACMM, Bangalore have come up in this proceeding seeking quashing of aforesaid criminal proceeding registered for an offence punishable under Section 420 r/w 34 of IPC.
2. Admittedly, complaint is filed by second respondent, who is one of the prospective purchaser of an apartment to be constructed by the petitioners under a sale deed, which is conveyed in favour of complainant for undivided share in the -3- property referred to in the sale deed with an understanding to construct a building thereon for the consideration received by them. It is seen that the transaction is of the year 2001 and for nearly 12 years the petitioners herein have not done anything except giving assurances, which has resulted in a complaint being filed against petitioners for an offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC. Thereafter, first respondent police, after investigation have filed charge sheet against petitioners 1 and 2 and the matter is pending consideration in CC.No.22796/2012. At this stage, the petitioners have come up in this proceeding seeking quashing of the same, on the ground that the dispute is civil in nature and that there is also a proceeding pending before the consumer forum with reference to the petition filed for deficiency of service. Therefore, the present petition would amount to multiplicity of proceeding and is an attempt to convert civil litigation in to criminal.
3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioners. Perused the material available on record. On going through the same, it is seen that filing of a complaint before the consumer forum would not come in the way of second respondent complainant -4- in lodging a complaint for cheating as alleged in the compliant. Even otherwise, the material available on record discloses that though complainant has parted with money in the year 2001, till today no development has taken place with reference to construction of the property assured to him. In that view of the matter, there appears to be prima facie triable case against petitioners 1 and 2. Therefore, quashing the criminal proceeding at this stage does not arise.
Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE nd/-