Karnataka High Court
Sri Nazeer Ahmed vs Sri S Sridhar on 17 December, 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6213 OF 2011
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1578 OF 2014
IN CRL. P. NO.6213/ 2011
BETWEEN:
SRI NAZEER AHMED
S/O LATE MUSTAFA
AGE:50 YEARS
MANAGING PARTNER
M/S. SHERIFF CONSTRUCTIONS
SHERIFF CENTRE NO.73/1
ST MARKS ROAD
BANGALORE 560 001. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A S KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI S SRIDHAR
S/O LATE H. SRINIVASAN
AGE:52 YEARS
NO.78, AGB COLONY 1ST STAGE
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
BANGALORE 560 011. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S SRIDHAR-RESPT.-SERVED
UNREPRESENTED)
****
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 CR.P.C. 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST THE PETR./ACCUSED NO.2 IN C.C.NO.17010/11
ARISING OUT OF PCR NO.4631/11 FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S
384, 418, 420 AND 425 OF IPC R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF
THE I ADDL.C.M.M., BANGALORE.
IN CRL. P. NO.1578/2014
BETWEEN:
MR. ZIAULLA SHERIFF
S/O GAFFAR SHERIFF
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
MANAGING PARTNER, M/S SHERIFF CONSTRUCTIONS
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT
SHERIFF CENTRE, # 73/1, ST.MARKS ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NATARAJ R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR. S. SRIDHAR
S/O LATE H.SRINIVASAN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
#78, AGB COLONY 1ST STAGE,
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM,
BENGALURU-560086. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S SRIDHAR ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH ALL PROCEEDINGS IN CC
NO.17010/2011 PENDING BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL CHIEF
3
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU REGISTERED
BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE
OFFENCS P/U/S 383, 415, 418 AND 425 OF IPC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Despite service of notice, the respondent has not appeared and is unrepresented.
The facts leading to these petitions are that the respondent - complainant had purchased three flats bearing Nos.1108, 1110 and 1208 in 'O' block in Platinum City housing complex, Yeshwanthpura, Bengaluru, constructed and sold by petitioners through registered Sale Deeds. Thereafter, some dispute arose in respect of furnishing NOC from fire and emergency services, issuance of occupancy certificate, etc., regarding 'O' block, in which the respondent - 4 complainant had purchased three flats. Thus, the respondent - complainant being the purchaser approached the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Bengaluru, and got the award for deficiency of service by the petitioners. After taking the award from the District Consumer Redressal Forum, the respondent - complainant filed a private complaint in PCR No.4631/2011 making false and frivolous allegations. On recording the sworn statement, the learned Magistrate passed an order for registering a case for the offences punishable under Sections 383, 415, 418 and 425 of IPC.
It is an admitted fact that the respondent - complainant had purchased three flats bearing Nos.1108, 1110 and 1208 in 'O' block of Platinum City housing complex, vide registered Sale Deeds dated 31.03.2006, 31.03.2006 and 31.11.2006. The learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously contended that 5 the construction in 'O' block of Platinum City housing complex was earmarked for economically weaker section. After making construction, the occupancy certificate and clearance from fire and emergency services and permission from other concerned departments could not be obtained. Therefore, the respondent - complainant had approached the District Consumer Redressal Forum alleging the deficiency of service and award was passed. The petitioners have satisfied the award passed by the said Forum and they have also purchased back the said three flats bearing Nos.1108, 1110 and 1208 in 'O' block from the respondent - complainant through three registered Sale Deeds dated 25.05.2012. The copies of the said Sale Deeds are produced in Criminal Petition No.1578/2014.
During the pendency of the PCR, the respondent - complainant has sold back these three flats purchased by him to the petitioners. Thus, he has no locus standi 6 to prosecute or to continue the further proceedings in C.C. No.17010/2011.
The respondent - complainant has remained absent despite service of notice. As such, this Court had no opportunity to hear his submissions.
As could be seen from the records, the copies of the three Sale Deeds dated 25.05.2012 in respect of flat Nos.1108, 1110 and 1208 in 'O' block of Platinum City housing complex, Bengaluru, are purchased back by the petitioners from the respondent - complainant. Thus, it is evident that the allegations made in the private complaint and the order dated 17.05.2011 passed by the Magistrate for registering the case against the petitioners cannot be sustained. For the foregoing reasons, I am of the view that this petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER 7 The petitions are allowed and the proceedings in C.C. No.17010/2011 pending on the file of the I Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 383, 415, 418 and 425 of IPC, is quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE SJ