Karnataka High Court
Vinayak S/O Hoova Tandel vs Smt. Vishranti D/O Damodar Tandel on 11 April, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
WP No. 101484 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 101484 OF 2021 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
VINAYAK S/O HOOVA TANDEL
OCC. BRANCH MANAGER,
VIJAYA BANK NOW BANK OF BARODA,
AT APMC YARD BRANCH, SIRSI,
R/O. CHOUDASHWARI COLONY,
AYYAPPANAGAR, SIRSI,
DIST. UTTARKANNADA 581402
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ASHOK R KALYANASHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. VISHRANTI
D/O DAMODAR TANDEL
OCC. TAILORING,
R/O KELAGIN MANJAGUNI,
Digitally
TQ. ANKOLA,
signed by V
VN
N BADIGER
Location:
BADIGER DHARWAD
Date:
DIST. UTTARKANNADA 581314
2022.04.21
10:35:33
+0530
2. THE SHO/ ASSSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR
ANKOLA POLICE STATION,
ANKOLA, AT. ANKOLA,
TQ. ANKOLA,
DIST. UTTARKANNADA 581314
3. THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR
WOMEN POLICE STATION,
-2-
WP No. 101484 of 2021
KARWAR, TQ. KARWAR,
DIST. UTTARKANNADA 581301
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R2 & R3)
(R1 - SERVED)
THIS WP IS FILED PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A
WRIT QUASHING THE FIR DATED 29.08.2018 AT ANNEXURE H
IN ANKOLA PS CR. NO.273/2018 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 417, 504 AND 506 IPC
AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS THEREIN TO PREVENT
MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE AND ABUSE OF PROCESS. B)
ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN
THE NATURE OF A WRIT QUASHING THE CHARGE SHEET AT
ANNEXURE N IN CC NO.294/2020 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/S 341, 417, 504 AND 506 ON THE FILE OF
PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC A NKOLA AND ALL
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO TO PREVENT
MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.
TIS WRRIT PETITION COMING FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, TH COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Charge sheet has been filed alleging that the cousin (maternal uncle's son) of respondent No.2, who is an accused, had a love affair with respondent No.2 for eleven years and used to call her and chat with her on Whatsapp. It is alleged that the petitioner-accused assured respondent No.2 to marry her, however on 08.07.2018, he -3- WP No. 101484 of 2021 called and told her not to call him repeatedly since his family members are not giving consent for his marriage with her and also threatened her with dire consequences. Subsequent to filing of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence punishable under section 341, 417, 504 & 506 of IPC and issued summons to the petitioner. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations made in the charge sheet does not disclose the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner. Hence, he submits that in the absence of any allegations and in the absence of any corroborative material, taking of the cognizance of the alleged offence against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate is impermissible. He further submits that the allegations that the accused promised to marry is not an inducement and the offence of cheating is not attracted. In support, he places reliance on an order of a co-ordinate Bench of this -4- WP No. 101484 of 2021 Court passed in Crl.R.P. No.233/2020 which is disposed of on 24.02.2020.
3. On the other hand, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondents-State submits that the charge sheet material clearly discloses the commission of the aforesaid offence by the petitioner and the learned Magistrate, after examining the charge sheet, has rightly taken cognizance of the aforesaid offences against the petitioner and sought for dismissal of the petition.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
5. The allegations in the charge sheet is that the petitioner accused, who is the son of the brother of mother of the informant, by promising to marry the informant frequently used to call her on the mobile, shared messages with her on Whatsapp and also used to take the informant out. To constitute an offence punishable under Section 417 of IPC, there must be an allegation that from -5- WP No. 101484 of 2021 inception, the intention of the accused was to cheat the informant. A mere promise to marry is not an inducement and the offence of cheating is not attracted.
6. To constitute an offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC, there must be material to establish that the accused had wrongfully restrained the informant from proceeding beyond certain limits. In the present case, the only allegation is that the petitioner had waylaid the informant and asked her not to make frequent phone calls. This allegation does not constitute the commission of the offence punishable under Section 341 of IPC.
7. To constitute the offences punishable under Section 504 & 506 of IPC, there must be an intentional insult of such a degree to provoke the public breach or commission of any other offence. In the present case, there is no allegation that the accused, by using abusive language, has committed any other offence or caused a break in public peace. Hence, the charge sheet filed against the petitioner for the offences punishable under -6- WP No. 101484 of 2021 Section 504 & 506 is without any substance. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The impugned proceeding in C.C. No.294/2020 pending on the file of the Principal civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Ankola, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE YAN,KMS