Karnataka High Court
Shekar B. Kunchur vs Smt. Hanamawwa @ Chonchahanamawwa on 13 August, 2013
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N. Ananda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANANDA
CRL.P. No.10205/2012 c/w CRL.P.10206/2012
IN CRL.P.10205/12:
BETWEEN:
SHEKAR B. KUNCHUR,
AGE: 41 YRS, OCC: ADVOCATE,
R/O. MANIGAR ONI,
HAVERI, DIST:HAVERI. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri S M KALWAD, ADV.)
AND
1. SMT. HANAMAWWA @ CHONCHAHANAMAWWA
W/O. NEELAPPA MADAR,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRIL.,
R/O. KAJJARI, TQ: RANEBENNUR
DIST: HAVERI.
2. SMT. CHADACHAWWA W/O. MAILAPPA MADAR
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRIL.,
R/O. AIRANI, PRESENTLY R/A. KAJJARI,
TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
3. NEELAPPA GAMANAPPA MALAGER @ MADAR,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRIL.,
R/O. KAJJARI, TQ: RANEBENNUR.
DIST: HAVERI. ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri VIJENDRA S BHIMAKKANAVAR, ADV.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2006 IN C.C
NO.519/2006 IN SO FAR AS TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE
2
OFFENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C NO.519/2006
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 403, 409, 417, 418, 420, 107, 108,
109 AND 120(B) R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & JMFC, HAVERI.
IN CRL.P.10206/2012:
BETWEEN
SHEKAR B KUNCHUR,
AGE: 41 YRS, OCC: ADVOCATE
R/O. MANIGAR ONI,
HAVERI, DIST: HAVERI. ... PETITIONER
(By Sri S M KALWAD, ADV.)
AND
HANUMAPPA S/O. GUDDAPPA MADAR @ KANAVALLI,
SINCE DEAD REP. BY HIS LRs:
KAREPPA S/O.HANUMAPPA MADAR,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRIL.,
R/O. KAJJARI, TQ: RANEBENNUR.
DIST: HAVERI. ... RESPONDENT
(By Sri.VIJENDRA S BHIMAKKANAVAR, ADV.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.09.2006 IN C.C
NO.518/2006 IN SO FAR AS TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE
OFFENCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C NO.518/2006
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SS 403, 409, 417, 418, 420, 107, 108,
109 AND 120(B) R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) & JMFC, HAVERI.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
The petitioner is arrayed as accused-2 in C.C.No.518/2006 and C.C.No.519/2006 registered for offences punishable under Sections 403, 409, 417, 418, 420, 107, 108, 109 and 120(B) R/W 34 OF IPC.
2. The respondents 1 and 2 in C.C.No.519/2006 who are direct sisters filed a complaint under Sec.200 Cr.P.C. alleging that petitioner and other accused, viz., accused-1 Neelappa Gamanappa Malager and accused-3 Land Acquisition Officer, Dharwad, have committed aforestated offences for receiving compensation payable for acquisition of land bearing Sy.No.202/1 in an extent of 3 acres 11 guntas which had been granted to the father and mother of respondents-1 and 2 by the Assistant Commissioner, Haveri, in terms of order No.LGL-SR-1751 dated 28.3.1958.
3. The learned trial Judge on perusal of complaint and sworn statement has passed the impugned order in C.C.519/06 reading as hereunder:
4
"The case of the complainant is that he had a property in R.S.No.202/1 measuring 3 Acres 11 Guntas. Out of the said land, portion of land is acquired for widening of National Highway. Accused no.1 was no way related to the complainant or his family. But, he has received the compensation amount from accused no.3 by colluding with accused no.2 claiming that they are the owners of property acquired by the Land Widening of National Highway. The allegations against accused no.3 is that accused no.3 without enquiring the ownership of the property granted the compensation to accused no.1. The accused no.2 is the Advocate, identified the accused no.1 as the owner of suit property stating that his property acquired by the Government.
I have perused the complaint averments, sworn statement of complainant, documents produced by the complainant and also produced by accused no.3 in pursuance of the summons issued by this court. On perusal of those documents, it prima-facie shows the commission of offence by the accused no.1 to 3 and accused no.3 negligently given money to accused no.1 instead of the complainant. Therefore, there is a sufficient material to take cognizance of the offence. Accused no.1 and 2 created the documents to get the compensation. In view of this, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The cognizance of the offence is taken against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 403, 409, 420, 417, 418, 107, 108, 120 (B) r/w Section 34 of IPC against accused no.1 to 3.
Registered the case as C.C. in Reg.No.3 5 Issue summons to accused on payment of P.F. returnable by 24.11.2006"
4. The petitioner herein is alleged to have identified I-accused as the owner of land bearing No.R.S.202/1 in an extent of 3 acres 11 guntas which was acquired for widening national highway. The petitioner has identified I-accused as the land owner for receiving compensation awarded for acquisition of the aforestated land.
5. The petitioner is alleged to have committed aforesaid acts knowing fully well that I-accused was not the owner and he was not entitled to receive compensation. The complainants were the owners and they were entitled to receive compensation. In a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. averments of complaint will have to be accepted on their face value.
6. Therefore, at this stage, there are no reasons to suspect the averments of complaint. 6
In the circumstances, there are no reasons to quash the proceedings. The petitions are dismissed, however, reserving liberty to petitioner to plead for discharge before trial Court.
SD/-
JUDGE Sub/