Karnataka High Court
Ahmed Nasir S/O. Abdul Rehman Shaik vs The State Of Karnataka on 3 June, 2014
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K.N. Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2014
BEFORE
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100698/2014
BETWEEN:
1. AHMED NASIR
S/O. ABDUL REHMAN SHAIK
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O. DONGARPALLI,
MUGDUM COLONY
BHATKAL, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA
2. SHAKEEL MULLA
S/O. ABDUL RAZAK
AGE: 42 YEARS,
OCC: PRINCIPAL
R/O. MADINA COLONY
BHATKAL, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA
3. NADEEM MULLA
S/O. ABDUL RAZAK
AGE: 39 YEARS,
OCC: EDUCATIONIST
R/O. MADINA COLONY
BHATKAL, DIST: UTTAR KANNADA.
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI R H ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
2
AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
(BHATKAL TOWN PS)
THROUGH ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2. MUMTAJBANU W/O. NURALLA
AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O. SHAHDALI STREET,
OPP. FAROOQI MASJID, BHATKAL.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, HIGH COURT
GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF
CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT
NO.53/2014 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE
FIR/COMPLAINT REGISTERED BY THE BHATKAL TOWN
POLICE AT THEIR P.S. CRIME NO.108/2014, DATED
2/04/2014, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
U/S 447, 427, 323, 354, 504, 506 R/W 34 IPC.
I.A. NO.1/2014 IS FILED FOR STAY.
THIS PETITION A/W. I.A. COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State. Perused the records.
2. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking for quashing of the proceedings in P.C. No.53/2014 and also to quash the F.I.R./complaint in Crime No.108/2014 of Bhatkal Town Police, which was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 323, 354, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.' for brevity).
3. The private complaint lodged by respondent No.2 in P.C. No.53/2014 discloses that complainant is the owner of Sy. No.605 of Soosgadi village in Bhatkal taluk. It is alleged that on 20.01.2014 petitioners have trespassed into the said land claiming their right over said land and have also caused damage to the red stones, which were stored by complainant 4 in the said land. It is also alleged that accused Nos.1 to 3 have assaulted the complainant and have abused her in filthy language and have tried to outrage her modesty by removing her burqa. It is further alleged that they have also threatened her with dire consequences of killing her. On referring the matter to police, it appears that, police have conducted investigation and investigation is still under progress.
4. Though the learned counsel for petitioners tried to persuade me by submitting that the complaint has been lodged before the Magistrate after two months and three days. There was a paper publication that these petitioners are nowhere connected with alleged offences, but all those things including the delay, in my opinion, have to be thrashed out during the course of investigation. Though the complaint discloses that the petitioners have committed above said offences, the truth or falsity of said allegations have to be thrashed out at the time of conducting 5 investigation. At this stage there are no materials to come to any different conclusion that those allegations are false. Therefore, I do not find any strong reason to admit this petition. Hence, petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.
In view of dismissal of main petition, I.A. No.1/2014 for stay does not survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE hnm/