Karnataka High Court
Ashwath vs The State Of Karnataka on 29 January, 2018
Author: K.N.Phaneendra
Bench: K. N. Phaneendra
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA
CRL.P. NO. 6206/2017
BETWEEN
1. ASHWATH @ ASHWATHNARAYANA
S/O NARASAPPA,
OCC:BUSINESS, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/O OLD KUMBARA STREET,
PAVAGADA TOWN, TUMKUR DISTRICT-561202
2. NOORIE @ KUNTA NOORIE
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS
R/O OLD KUMBARA STREET,
PAVAGADA TOWN,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-561202
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DINESH KUMAR K. RAO., ADV. FOR
SRI.R B DESHPANDE., ADV.)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY PAVAGADA POLICE STATION,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-561202
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. VADI SRINIVASULU
S/O VENKATARAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O 16TH WARD
VENKATESHWARA NILAYA,
GANDHINAGARA
2
PAVAGADA TOWN,
TUMKUR DISTRICT-561 202.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.RACHAIAH., HCGP FOR R1 AND
SRI. CHARAN KUMAR K.V., ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FIR/COMPLAINT REGISTERED AGAINST
THE PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.149/2017 OF PAVAGADA
P.S., TUMKURU DISTRICT, AND ITS CONSEQUENT
PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL
JUDGE (Jr. Dn) AND JMFC, PAVAGADA, TUMKURU
(REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 420.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Sri. Charan Kumar K.V., Advocate, has filed vakalath for Respondent No.2.
3. Petitioners and Respondent No.2 have filed an application under Section 320(2) of Cr.PC. and as well the 2nd respondent has filed his affidavit. The 2nd respondent in his affidavit has stated that, on the advice of the well-wishers and other family members, the petitioners and himself have entered into a compromise.
3
4. The offence under Section 420 of IPC is not punishable either with a sentence death or for life imprisonment, but it is non-compoundable.
5. From the factual matrix of the case it is seen that, the 2nd respondent lodged a complaint on 15.06.2017 against the petitioners stating that the petitioners have been doing Matka business and assured some people that he would give Rs.90/- per One Rupee and in that context, he was cheating the people at large. One Mr. kondlaralya Ramanna @ Subbarayappa is the person who suffered at the hands of the petitioner-Ashwath and Nuri @ Kunti Nuri, but, as the said person has no guts to go to the police and lodge a complaint, on behalf of the said person, it is stated that the 2nd respondent has given a complaint to the Police in that regard. Therefore, it clearly goes to show that, the person who actually suffered loss at the hands of the petitioner has not filed any complaint and no other materials are placed by the complainant to show that the petitioner had been doing such an act. 4
6. Under the above circumstances, I am of the opinion that, when the allegations do not attract Section 420 of IPC, there is no question of continuation of such proceedings. In the said circumstances, the petition deserves to be quashed on the basis of the above said compromise. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER The petition is allowed. IA No.1/2018 filed for compounding the offence is accepted. Consequently, all further proceedings to be taken in pursuance of registration of Crime No.149/2017 against the petitioners, for the offence under Section 420 of IPC, on the file of the Pavagada Police, Tumakuru District, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KGR*