Karnataka High Court
Sri R Yallappa vs G T Jayarama Raj Urs on 14 February, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5174 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1 SRI R YALLAPPA
S/O LATE KRISHNA MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/O M J NAGAR NO.63,
32ND WARD,
NEAR MUDIYAPPA TEMPLE,
CHITRAKERI CIRCLE
HOSPET BELLARY DISTRICT-583201
2. SRI H P SOHAN
S/O LATE B R HANUMANTHA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
CLOTH MERCHANT,
KOTTUR ROAD
KOODILIGI BELLARY
DISTRICT-583135
3. SRI K S SUBRAMANYA GUPTA
S/O SOMANNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
NO.324,
20TH WARD,
BESIDES VIMAL TEXTILES
MAIN ROAD,
HOSPETE
BELLARY
DISTRICT-583201
2
4. SMT M P VIJAYA DURGA
W/O M K PRASANNA BARADAKERI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OPP: GARADIMANI #355/356
32ND WARD,
CHITRAKERI HOSPETE
BELLARY DISTRICT-583201
5. M K PRASANNA
S/O KOTRAPPA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
#355/356
32ND WARD
BARADAKERI OPP: GARADIMANI
HOSPETE
BELLARY DISTRICT-583201
6. SRI A SRIDHARA SHETTY
S/O AMIDAL VENKANNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
#180, 34TH WARD,
NEAR RAMALINGA TEMPLE
CHITRAKERI HOSPETE
BELLARY DISTRICT-583201
7. SRI SRIDHARA J UDDAR
S/O JANANDANA UDDAR
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
#1208A, 22ND WARD,
2ND CROSS, NEAR PATIL HIGH SCHOOL
HOSPETE BELLARY
DISTRICT-583201
8. SRI DEVENDAR SHETTY
S/O CHANDRA SHEKAR SHETTY
BUSINESSMAN & PIGMY AGENT
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
#CHIDHAMBARA GEN. STORE
A. C. OFFICE ROAD,
3
OPP: VIKAS BHAVANA, J P NAGARA
HOSPETE
BELLARY DISTRICT-583201
9. SRI K SHIVAKUMAR SHETTY
S/O VENKANNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
#14TH WARD NEAR B D TEMPLE,
HOSPETE BELLARY
DISTRICT-583201
10 SRI K HANUMANTHA ACHAR
S/O H GOVINDA ACHAR
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
#830/A, 10TH CROSS,
HANUMA LAKSHMAMMA NILAYA
29TH WARD M J NAGARA
HOSPETE BELLARY
DISTRICT-583201
11 . SRI. K.BABU RAJENDRA PRASAD
S/O LATE SRI MALLIKARJUNA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
#GURU DODDABASAVESHWARA
GENERAL STORES, DAM ROAD
HOSPETE, BELLARY
DISTRICT 583201
12 . SRI K VEERANNA
S/O K KARIBASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
#125, OLD COURT ROAD,
NEKKAR COLONY OLD H B HALLI
HARANGI
BIOMMANA HALLI
BELLARY
DISTRICT-583201
4
13 SRI R AJAY KUMAR
S/O V RAMACHANDRA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
#16TH WARD, 9TH CROSS,
BASAVESHWARA BADAVANE
HOSPETE
BELLARY
DISTRICT-583201
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI S.G.RAJENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
G T JAYARAMA RAJ URS
S/O PATEL THIMME GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/O GAVANAHALLI VILLAGE
RAMPURA POST
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK
& DISTRICT-577001
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.JAVEED S, ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS PRAYING THAT
THIS HONORABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE
ORDER DATED 05.03.2019 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKKAMAGALURU IN
C.C.NO.395/2019 AND TAKING COGNIZANCE FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 323, 342, 392, 395, 406, 420,
423, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND ETC.
.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
5
ORDER
This petition is filed against the order passed by the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkamagaluru in CC.No.395/2019 taking cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 342, 392, 395, 406, 420, 423, 504, 506 R/w 149 of IPC against the petitioners.
2. The respondent has filed a private complaint in PCR No.614/2016 alleging that accused on 29.12.2014 at Aavishkar Sauharda Co-Operative Society at Hospet Branch at about 9.30 a.m. formed unlawful assembly with a common object to harass the complainant and others and abused him in filthy language and also assaulted him. They were threatened to give all their amount and confined them wrongfully gave him a threat. Later complainant and other persons were forced to execute sale agreement of immovable properties standing in their names situated at Chikkamagaluru. It is further alleged that the accused persons have forcibly taken away the mobile phones and belongings of the complainant and others. They wrongfully confined the complainant and others from 29.12.2014 till 6 02.01.2015 at Hospet. It is further alleged that on 05.01.2015 the petitioners contacted the complainant and registered the properties bearing Sy.Nos.29/1 and 64 in their favour, however no consideration amount was paid to the complainant. Hence, the complainant sought to take action against the petitioners for having committed the aforesaid offences.
3. The jurisdictional Magistrate referred the matter to the Jurisdictional Police for investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. After the investigation, the police filed 'B' report before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate issued a notice to the complainant. The complainant filed protest petition to the 'B' report submitted by the Jurisdictional Police. The learned Magistrate at first instance recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and after taking cognizance of the offences as alleged against the petitioners, issued summons. Being aggrieved, petitioners is before this Court.
4. Petitioners submits that the offences alleged against the petitioners are cognizable and non-bailable in 7 nature, as such the complainant without complying the requirement under Section 154(3)(4) of Cr.P.C has filed a Private complaint. He further submits that the alleged incident has taken place at Hospet, however, the cognizance has been taken at Chikkamagaluru and the same is not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction. He further submits that the petitioners lodged FIR against the complainant for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 408 and 409 IPC and the police after investigation have filed charge sheet against the complainant. Hence, submits that private complaint filed by the complainant is by way of counterblast.
5. He further submits that there is more than two years delay in filing complaint. Hence, on this ground he submits that impugned proceedings before the Magistrate requires to be quashed.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the learned Magistrate after considering the material on record has rightly rejected 'B' report and issued summons to the petitioners. 8
7. I have examined the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
8. It is undisputed that the offences alleged against petitioners are cognizable and non-bailable. However, complainant without complying with the requirement of Section 154(1) and 154(3) of Cr.P.C has filed the complaint and the same is not maintainable as held by the Apex Court in "Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others".
9. The alleged incident has taken place at Hospet and the Private Complaint is filed at Chikkamagaluru. The learned Magistrate ignoring this aspect, registered the complaint against the petitioners and same is not sustainable in law for want of territorial jurisdiction.
10. The alleged incident has taken place in the year 2014 and the Private Complaint was lodged in the year 2016. However, no explanation is offered by the complainant for the delay in filing the complaint, which 9 implies that the complaint filed so as to falsely implicate the petitioners and as a counter blast to the charge sheet filed against him for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 408, 409 and Section 34 of IPC on the FIR lodged by the petitioner No.7 herein. The complaint filed by the 2nd respondent is with malice and without any probable cause.
11. In view of the forgoing reasons, the impugned proceeding registered against petitioners by learned Magistrate requires to be quashed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) Criminal Petition allowed.
ii) The order dated 05.03.206 passed
by II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC,
Chikkamagaluru in CC.No.395/2019 against the petitioners is hereby quashed.
iii) Impugned proceeding in CC.No.395/2019 pending on the file of II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkamagaluru is hereby quashed for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 342, 10 392, 395, 406, 420, 423, 504, 506 R/w 149 is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE BH