Karnataka High Court
Mrs. Chithkala Mallikarjun vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 March, 2021
Author: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
Bench: H.B.Prabhakara Sastry
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE H.B.PRABHAKARA SASTRY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5753 OF 2019 c/w.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4079 OF 2019 &
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5080 OF 2019
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5753 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
Mrs. Chithkala Mallikarjun
Aged around 59 years,
D/o. Sri. N.C. Mallikarjunaiah
# 543, 5th Cross,
Mahalakshmi Layout,
Bengaluru - 560 010.
..Petitioner
(By Sri. Ravishankar A., Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Through Cubbonpark Police Station,
Near Queen's Circle, Kasturba Road,
Bengaluru, Karnataka 560001,
represented by the State Public Prosecutor.
2. Sri. A.R. Laakshman Sastry,
Aged about 54 years,
S/o. ALR Sastry, R/a No.10, 7th Cross,
N.R. Colony, Bengaluru - 560 019.
.. Respondents
(By Sri. Thejesh P., High Court Govt. Pleader for R-1;
Sri. Karan Joseph, Advocate for R2)
Crl.P.No.5753/2019
2 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019
Crl.P.No.5080/2019
****
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire
proceedings initiated as against the petitioner on the file of VIII
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City, in
C.C.No.30973/2018 (PCR No.14252/2018) filed under Section
200 r/w. Section 190(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. r/w. Sections 499 and 500
of the IPC at Annexure Q by the respondent No.2 and the order
passed at Annexure S herein and grant such other reliefs as this
Court deems fit to grant in the ends of equity and justice.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4079 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
Mr.M.S. Giridhar,
Aged 65 years,
S/o. Late M. Srinivasulu Naidu,
President, Century Club No.1,
Sheshadri Road,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
R/a No.857, 6th Cross,
6th Block, Koramangala,
Bengaluru - 560 095.
..Petitioner
(By Sri. Ravishankar A., Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Through Cubbonpark Police Station,
Near Queens Circle, Kasturba Road,
Bengaluru, Karnataka 560001,
represented by the State Public Prosecutor.
2. Sri. A.R. Laakshman Sastry,
Aged about 54 years,
S/o. ALR Sastry, R/a No.10, 7th Cross,
N.R. Colony, Bengaluru - 560 019.
.. Respondents
(By Sri. Thejesh P., High Court Govt. Pleader for R-1;
Sri. Karan Joseph, Advocate for R2)
Crl.P.No.5753/2019
3 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019
Crl.P.No.5080/2019
****
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire
proceedings initiated as against the petitioner on the file of VIII
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City in
C.C.No.5344/2019 filed under Section 200 r/w. 190(1)(a) of
Cr.P.C. r/w. Sections 499, 500, 504 and 506 of the IPC and
grant such other reliefs as this Court deems fit to grant in the
ends of equity and justice.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5080 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1. Mr. Vijay Chander
Aged 62 years,
S/o. Late T.P. Venugopal,
Executive Member Century Club,
R/a No.204, Mathru Krupa
Apartments, Sanjaynagar,
Nagashettyhalli,
Bengaluru - 560 094.
2. Mr.Suresh Naidu,
Aged 72 years,
S/o.T.G. Srinivasulu,
Vice President Century Club,
R/a J4, 4th Floor,
Krishna Glade Apartment,
105/1, Sheshadripuram Main Road,
Palace Guttahalli Circle,
Bengaluru.
..Petitioners
(By Sri. Ravishankar A., Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Through Cubbon park Police Station,
Near Queen's Circle, Kasturba Road,
Bengaluru, 560001,
represented by the State Public Prosecutor.
Crl.P.No.5753/2019
4 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019
Crl.P.No.5080/2019
2. Sri. A.R. Laakshman Sastry,
Aged about 54 years,
S/o. ALR Sastry, R/a No.10, 7th Cross,
N.R. Colony, Bengaluru - 560 019.
.. Respondents
(By Sri. Thejesh P., High Court Govt. Pleader for R-1;
Sri. Karan Joseph, Advocate for R2)
****
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire
proceedings initiated as against the petitioners on the file of VIII
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in
C.C.No.5344/2019 filed under Section 200 r/w. Section
190(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. r/w. Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC at
Annexure Q by the respondent No.2 and the order passed at
Annexure T herein and grant such other reliefs as this Court
deems fit to grant in the ends of equity and justice.
These Criminal Petitions having been heard through
physical hearing/video conferencing hearing and reserved on
12-03-2021, coming on for pronouncement of Orders this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5753/2019 has prayed for quashing the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C.No.30973/2018 (PCR No.14252/2018) on the file of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Trial Court"), for the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 Crl.P.No.5753/2019 5 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the IPC").
In Criminal Petition No.4079/2019 and Criminal Petition No.5080/2019, the petitioners have sought for quashing the entire proceedings as against them pending in C.C.No. 5344/2019, in the Trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, 504, and 506 of the IPC.
The criminal case, i.e. C.C.No.5344/2019 is for the offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, 504 and 506 of the IPC. The petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 4079/2019 has mentioned all these offences in his prayer column, whereas the petitioners in Criminal Petition No.5080/2019 have mentioned only Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC as the offences in C.C.No.5344/2019 in the prayer column. However, a perusal of the certified copy of the order dated 18-03-2019 passed in the matter by the Trial Court would go to show that, the Court has registered the said criminal case for the offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, 504 and 506 of the IPC. Crl.P.No.5753/2019 6 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
2. The summary of the case of the complainant in C.C No.5344/2019, wherein the petitioners in Criminal Petition No.5080/2019 are accused Nos. 1 and 3 respectively and petitioner in Criminal Petition No.4079/2019 is accused No.2 is that, the complainant is a member of the Century Club (hereinafter for brevity referred to as " the Club") and a former Executive Committee member of the said Club which is situated in Sheshadri Road, Bengaluru. The accused No. 1 is its Executive Member, accused No.2 is the President and accused No.3 is the Vice-President of the said Club, as on the date of the complaint. The complainant has stated in his complaint that he was receiving the messages from a group on WhatsApp, which he shared with accused No.1, since accused No. 1 was Chairman of the Party Hall. The accused No.1, instead of taking action, sent a message, accusing the complainant of suffering from selective amnesia and the like. The complainant has further stated that the content of the defamatory statement by the accused No.1 was totally false. The accused No.2 being the President of the Club along with accused No.3, took the issue in an emergency Executive Committee meeting which was held on 16-07-2018 and issued a show cause notice to the complainant. Crl.P.No.5753/2019 7 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 The complainant alleged that, the accused persons have jointly conspired and attempted to maliciously malign his reputation. They have intentionally levelled defamatory statement against him. With this, he prayed for taking action against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC.
3. The Trial Court, by its order dated 18-03-2019, observing that the complainant has made out grounds to proceed against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, 504 and 506 of the IPC, ordered for registering the case as a criminal case.
4. In Criminal Petition No.5753/2019, the complainant in his private complaint filed under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as "the Cr.P.C.") before the Trial Court has stated that, on 18-08-2018, he was informed by Mr.Suresh Naidu (petitioner No. 2 in Criminal Petition No.5080/2019), one of the members of the Century Club, Bengaluru, that, Ms. Chithkala (accused in PCR No.14252/2018 who is the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5753/2019), who was part of the Executive Committee Crl.P.No.5753/2019 8 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 meeting of the Century Club, which was held on 10-08-2018, made a false propaganda and made the defamatory statement against him (complainant) in the said meeting. The said statement had gone viral against the other members of the said Club. Stating that the said statement made by the accused had spoiled his reputation, the complainant (respondent No.2) has prayed for taking appropriate action against her for the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC.
The Trial Court by its order dated 19-11-2018 observing that the complainant has made out grounds to proceed against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC, ordered for registering the criminal case and for issuance of summons.
It is challenging those two criminal cases, the petitioners have preferred the present petitions.
6. The respondent No.1 - State by Cubbonpark Police Station, is being represented by the learned High Court Government pleader and the respondent No.2 is being represented by his counsel in all these matters.
7. Heard the argument from both side.
8. Perused the materials placed before this Court. Crl.P.No.5753/2019 9 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
9. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, the only point that arise for my consideration in these petitions is:
"Whether the petitioners herein have made out a ground to exercise the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and quash the criminal cases, as prayed in the petitions?"
10. Learned counsel for the petitioners in all these three petitions submitted that, on 16-07-2018, accused No.1 - Mr. Vijay Chander communicated to the Secretary of the Club about the misbehaviour by complainant in the presence of the Club members. In that regard, a Show Cause Notice was issued by the Secretary of the Club to the complainant (respondent No.2). The complainant refuted the allegations made against him in his reply to the Show Cause Notice. However, on 10-08-2018, the Executive Committee of the Club took up the issue of misbehaviour of the complainant in the Club premises and had set-up an Enquiry Committee. In the meantime, the complainant was suspended from the Club membership, pending enquiry. On 10-09-2018, the said Committee forwarded the report stating that the second respondent (complainant) has violated the bye-laws of the Club. In this process, there were exchange of WhatsApp messages between the complainant and Crl.P.No.5753/2019 10 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 the accused and it is only picking up some of the communication of the accused persons, the complainant has alleged that, he was defamed by the accused persons in both the cases.
11. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2, in his argument, did not deny the chronology of events as placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that, the messages sent through WhatsApp by the petitioners herein have spoiled the reputation of the complainant, as such, he has been defamed. He further submitted that, thereafter, the complainant was even threatened by the men of the Club who were sent by the petitioners herein.
12. Learned counsel for the petitioners in his argument further submitted that, no defamatory statements were ever made by any of the petitioners and there was only exchange of WhatsApp messages between the accused No. 1 - Sri. Vijay Chander and the complainant. Even the messages sent by the said accused No. 1 were also not defamatory, rather the messages sent by the complainant themselves were defamatory and derogatory.
Crl.P.No.5753/201911 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
He further submitted that, the petitioners, as members of the Executive Committee have initiated the enquiry proceedings as per the bye-laws of the Club, which they were legally expected to do as members of the Executive Committee of a registered body. Enraged by the same, the complainant has filed a false case against them.
He also submitted that, Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC have not been complained of by the complainant in his complaint, still, the Trial Court, in the absence of any allegation, has registered the case even for those offences also.
13. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that the WhatsApp messages exchanged between the parties would clearly go to show that, the petitioners have called the complainant as a 'liar' and have defamed him. Further, the complainant in his complaint itself has stated that, he has been threatened by the men sent by the petitioners. The defamatory messages have been circulated among all the members, as such, there is publication of defamatory statement made by the petitioners against the complainant. Therefore, noticing a prima facie ground to proceed further, the Trial Court has rightly registered the present criminal cases.
Crl.P.No.5753/201912 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
14. In both the criminal cases challenged in these three petitions, the main allegations made by the complainant against the petitioners are for the offence under Section 499 of the IPC, which is punishable under Section 500 of the IPC.
15. Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, excluding its Exceptions, except Exception No. 7 reads as below.
Section 499. Defamation - Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter expected, to defame that person.
Explanation 1.- It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives.
Explanation 2.- It may amount to defamation to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such.
Explanation 3.- An imputation in the form of an alternative or expressed ironically, may amount to defamation.
Explanation 4.- No imputation is said to harm a person's reputation, unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful.
xxxx xxxx Crl.P.No.5753/2019 13 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 Seventh Exception.- Censure passed in good faith by person having lawful authority over another.- It is not defamation in a person having over another any authority, either conferred by law or arising out of a lawful contract made with that other, to pass in good faith any censure on the conduct of that other in matters to which such lawful authority relates.
xxxxx xxxxx"
A reading of the above Section would go to show that, to constitute 'defamation' under Section 499 of the IPC, there must be an imputation and such imputation must have been made with an intention of harming or knowing or having reason to believe that, it will harm the reputation of the person about whom it is made. It would be sufficient to show that the accused intended or knew or had reason to believe that the imputation made by him would harm the reputation of the complainant irrespective of whether the complainant actually suffered directly or indirectly from the imputation alleged.
It is also to be noticed that the 'defamatory statement' must be false, otherwise, it is not considered damaging. Even terribly mean or disparaging things are not defamatory if the shoe fits. Most opinions do not amount to defamation, because, they cannot be proved to be objectively false. Crl.P.No.5753/2019 14 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
16. In the instant case, according to the complainant, as contended in his complaint, the explicit defamatory statement from the accused No.1 - Mr. Vijay Chander is as follows;-
"you seem to be suffering from selective amnesia, recall the decisions taken when Mr. Jairaj was the President and you were a part of that Committee. You are also a compulsive liar and you fabricate false stories to appease you masters. You are repeatedly insulting this committee, office bearers and even the GD. You have any issues write to office not me."
The above message is said to be the text message. With respect to the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5753/2019, the alleged explicit defamatory statement said to have been made by her towards the complainant and as contended by the complainant in his complaint is as follows:-
"Miss Chithkala said that member Mr. Laaksman Shastri also called the contesting AC members as future "Golmaal committee" during election time and therefore the rule against him must be strictly enforced."
17. Learned counsel for the petitioners, in his argument drew the attention of this Court to Annexure E of his petition in Criminal Petition No.4079/2019, which is the printed version of the alleged WhatsApp messages said to have been exchanged between the accused and the complainant. The said exchange of messages has not been denied or disputed from the second Crl.P.No.5753/2019 15 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 respondent's side, on the other hand, they also submitted that the said Annexure E gives a detailed account of the messages that have been exchanged between the accused (more particularly, the accused No.1 - Vijay Chander) and the complainant. It shows series of exchange of text messages between the accused No.1 - Vijay Chander and the complainant. Some of the messages since do not show the date, it cannot be made out as to on which date it was sent or received. However, according to the serial number of the pages arranged in the petition, if the age of the messages can be considered, accordingly, the first message sent by the petitioner to the accused No.1 - Vijay Chander reads as below:-
"please suspend me if you have anything against me."
"let this committee do it."
According to u, how much money have I amassed in the Club finances by appeasing my bosses can u pls elaborate"
The accused shown to have replied as below:
"you need help"
"confirmed liar"
Further, the exchange of text messages between the complainant and the accused No.1 - Vijay Chander is as below:- Crl.P.No.5753/2019 16 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
From the complainant to From the Accused No.1 -
accused No.1 - Vijay Vijay Chander to the
Chander complainant
Thanks for u r wonderful title
You richly deserve it
Liar
U richly deserve it bastard
Await for my reply
Liar
At a common place with
necessary steps
Bastard
...
....
I shall file a defermation suit
against u
Ok
Let the Court decide
Go to Court if you have guts
....
U want to drag names of
former Chief Secretary of the
Government who was the
President.
Liar
You seem to be suffering
from selective amnesia,
recall the decisions taken
when Mr.Jairaj was the
president and you were a
part of that committee. You
are also a compulsive liar
and you fabricate false
stories to appease you
masters. You are
repeatedly insulting this
committee, office bearers,
and even the GB. You have
any issues write to office
not me.
Calling me "compulsive liar"
Absolutely yes
Thanks.
Lets go head on
Fine. bring it on.
The background behind these exchange of text messages between the complainant and accused No.1 appears to have Crl.P.No.5753/2019 17 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 been a consequence of certain development which appear to have taken place in the Century Club, where both the accused and the complainant were members.
19. A perusal of the documents in the form of Annexures produced with the petitions, particularly, with Criminal Petition No.4079/2019, leads to the following inferences:
The accused No.1 - Vijay Chander, who is the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5080/2019 wrote a letter dated 16-07-2018 to the Secretary of the Century Club, as per Annexure 'C', wherein he has complained that the (present respondent No.2) complainant has been posting WhatApp messages, rediculing the office bearers as 'office beaters" and abusing him as 'bastard' repeatedly. He also stated in his letter that the act of the present respondent No.2 amounts to violation of Rule 19 and all its sub-clauses. He has also referred to an alleged illegal act of the present respondent No.2 said to have been committed by him when he was a Committee member of the Club in the year 2015-16. Based upon the said complaint, the Century Club vide Annexure F dated 23-07-2018, issued a show cause notice to the present respondent No.2 alleging that he has violated Rule 19 Crl.P.No.5753/2019 18 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 with various sub-rules of the Rules of the Club. The present respondent No.2 submitted his reply as per Annexure G dated 01-08-2018, denying all the allegations levelled against him. However, the Executive Committee in its meeting dated 10-08-2018 which is at Annexure H which included all the three petitioners herein as its Executive Committee members, considered the complaint of the accused No.1 - Vijay Chander and also the circulated copies of the messages by him which are said to have been exchanged between him and the present respondent No.2 and it was unanimously decided in the Executive Committee meeting to suspend the membership of the present respondent No.2 pending enquiry as per the Rules of the Club. As could be seen from Annexure L dated 10-09-2018, the Enquiry Committee submitted its report to the Executive Committee observing that, the accused No.1 - Vijay Chander's conduct in calling the respondent No.2 as 'compulsive liar' was not conduct befitting a member of the Executive Committee. However, it opined that the un-parliamentary expressions used by the respondent No.2 (complainant) against an Executive Committee member and his unwillingness to tender apology though he had initially agreed to appear before the Executive Crl.P.No.5753/2019 19 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 Committee and tender apology, and further action of the respondent No.2 (complainant) questioning the action of the Executive Committee member on social media, has violated the spirit of Rule 19.15.4 of the Rules and Regulations of the Club under the Memorandum of Rules Chapter. These developments have not been denied by the second respondent in these petitions.
Thus, an overall consideration of these developments would go to show that with respect to the conduct of the business of the Club, there was difference of opinion between the present respondent No.2, who was the earlier Executive Committee member and the present petitioners who are said to be subsequent Executive Committee members and in that regard it is also stated that, certain irregularities in conducting the Club were alleged against each other, which also had made the present respondent No.2 to approach the City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bangalore and instituting a civil suit in O.S.No.1572/2019 for the relief of declaration, etc. It is in that background, the exchange of whatsApp messages which are at Annexure E, more particularly, that portion of the alleged Crl.P.No.5753/2019 20 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 defamatory statement highlighted by the second respondent in his complaint, has taken place.
20. Similarly, Ms. Chithkala's alleged defamatory statement is also not what actually the complainant claims to have directly heard from her. Even according to the complainant, it was one Sri. Suresh Naidu, one of the members of the Club who is said to have stated to him that, Ms. Chithkala made such statement in a meeting of the Club said to have been held on 10-08-2018. Even according to the complainant, the Minutes of the meeting does not bear any such alleged statement said to have been made by Ms. Chithkala. Even otherwise also, when the said statement which has been extracted above, is isolated and read, still, it does not show that there is any loss of reputation of the complainant by the alleged statement, wherein Ms. Chithkala is alleged to have stated that the complainant made some statement against the Executive Committee members using the word "Golmaal Committee".
21. From the above, it is clear that the present respondent No.2, who was suspended from his membership from the Century Club, which was at the instance of the accused No.1 - Crl.P.No.5753/2019 21 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019
Vijay Chander involving other Executive Committee members, who are the other petitioners, somehow wanted to proceed against them through some means, has filed the complaint alleging defamation against them, when in fact, the circumstance of the case, prima facie would go to show that, no case of defamation, much less, the offences alleged under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC are made out.
At this stage, it cannot be ignored of the fact that the said reaction that the present complainant (respondent No.2) was a 'liar' came from the accused No.1 subsequent to the complainant said to have messaged accused No.1 -Vijay Chander calling him as 'bastard'.
Incidentally, the respondent No.2 in his complaint has not prayed for prosecuting the accused therein for the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC. However, looking at a paragraph in the complaint that the complainant alleged to have been threatened by the alleged agents or servants of the accused, the Trial Court had proceeded to take cognizance even for the alleged offences under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC. Since it is now convinced that the continuation Crl.P.No.5753/2019 22 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 of the said criminal case would be an abuse of the process of law against all the three petitioners herein, this Court finds it an appropriate case to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and to quash the criminal proceedings pending against them in the Trial Court.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER [i] All the petitions, i.e. Criminal Petition No.5753/2019, Criminal Petition No.4079/2019 & Criminal Petition No.5080/2019 are allowed; [ii] The criminal proceedings in C.C.No.30973/2018 (PCR No.14252/2018), for the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5753/2019 and the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.5344/2019, for the offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.4079/2019 and petitioners in Criminal Petition No.5080/2019, both the said criminal cases pending on Crl.P.No.5753/2019 23 C/w. Crl.P.No.4079/2019 Crl.P.No.5080/2019 the file of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, stand quashed. Registry to transmit a copy of this order to the Trial Court, without delay.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMV*