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 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Venkatamma vs State Of Karnataka on 15 November, 2018

Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar

Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar

                          1



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018

                       BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

        CRIMINAL PETITION No.5601 OF 2013

BETWEEN

1.     SMT. VENKATAMMA
       WIFE OF KRISHNAPPA
       (FIRST HUSBAND NAME
       LATE AKKA NELLEPPA)
       AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
       R/O BASAPURA VILLAGE
       TEKAL HOBLI, MALUR TALUK
       KOLAR DISTRICT
       PINCODE 563130.

2.     C NARAYANAPPA
       @ NARAYANASWAMY
       SON OF LATE K CHINNAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
       R/O DODDA SABBENHALLI VILLAGE
       MALUR TALUK
       KOLAR DISTRICT
       PINCODE 563130.

3.     K V MUNIVENKATE GOWDA
       @ K V M GOWDA
       @ RAJANNA
       SON OF VENKATASWAMY GOWDA
       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
       R/O KALKERE VILLAGE
       LAKKUR HOBLI, PRESENTLY AT
                            2



      ARALERI ROAD
      MALUR TOWN
      KOLAR DISTRICT
      PINCODE 563130.

4.    T KRISHNAPPA
      SON OF THIMMARAYAPPA
      AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
      R/O HULIMANGALA VILLAGE
      MALUR TALUK
      PRESENTLY RESIDING NEAR
      REDDY CHOULTRY
      MALUR TOWN
      KOLAR DISTRICT
      PINCODE 563130.
                                    ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ANANTHARAMA C, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
      REPRESENTED BY
      POLICE SUB INSPECTOR
      MALUR POLICE STATION
      MALUR-563 130

2.    SMT. VENKATAMMA
      WIFE OF LATE AKKA NELLEPPA
      AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS
      R/O SEEKANAPALLI GRAMA
      B KURUBARHALLI POST
      HOSURU TALUK
      KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT
      TAMIL NADU
      PINCODE 600 143.

3.    S M RAMAKRISHNAPPA
      S/O K MUNIYAPPA
      AGED 61 YEARS
                               3



     R/OF DODDA SABBENHALLI VILLAGE
     KASABA HOBLI
     MALUR TALUK
     PINCODE 563130.
                                   ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R1)


     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482   CR.P.C  PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE  ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST PETITIONERS IN C.C.NO.263/11
PENDING CONSIDERATION ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.
CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC, MALUR, KOLAR DIST.
VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET
AGAINST PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.263/2011 PENDING
CONSIDERATION ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE
(JR.DN.) AND JMFC, MALUR, KOLAR DISTRICT VIDE
ANNEXURE-A.


     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON                    FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE                       THE
FOLLOWING:-

                        ORDER

Heard Shri. Anantharama. C, learned advocate for the petitioners and Shri. S. Rachaiah, learned HCGP for the state.

2. The second respondent filed FIR in Crime No.190/2008 in Malur Police Station alleging 4 commission of offence punishable under Sections 465 and 420 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, stating that by gift deed prepared in the name of second respondent the agricultural property belonging to her has been transferred in the name of one C.Narayanappa- accused No.2. After investigation the Police have filed charge sheet.

3. The complaint is of the year 2008. To a query posed by this Court, the learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the evidence of the parties is being recorded.

4. The ground for interference urged by the learned advocate for the petitioners is that the investigation is not proper and he prays that the fresh investigation may be ordered. 5

5. Shri S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP submits that the allegations of impersonation is a matter which requires evidence.

6. In substance, the learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they are implicated due to imperfect investigation. The undisputed fact is, pursuant to a complaint of impersonation, charge sheet has been filed.

7. The plea of innocence urged on behalf of the petitioners is a matter which will have to be decided after trial.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no grounds are made out for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

6

In view of the dismissal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2013 does not survive for consideration and is accordingly dismissed.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE JT/-