Karnataka High Court
Pinku Maiti vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 March, 2024
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:12740
WP No. 8253 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 8253 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
PINKU MAITI
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
S/O GOPAL MAITI
R/AT NO.25, 1ST FLOOR
3RD MAIN, 6TH CROSS
ATHMANANDA COLONY
SULTHAN PALYA
BENGALURU - 560 032.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SATYANARAYANA CHALKE S, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY SHO
Digitally signed HALASURGATE POLICE STATION
by B A
KRISHNA REPT. BY THE SPP, HIGH COURT OF
KUMAR
Location: HIGH
KARNATAKA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR
COURT OF VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.
KARNATAKA
2. UDDUS MALLIK
AGED 32 YEARS
S/O KUDDUS ALI MALLIK
R/AT SAMARTH DYE HUB
NO.16/1, GROUND FLOOR
CHOLLAGALLI CUBBONPETE
BENGALURU - 560 002.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R. RANGASWAMY, HCGP FOR R-1;
SRI M. DEVARAJU, ADV., FOR R-2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:12740
WP No. 8253 of 2024
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 31900/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 324, 323, 364A, 506
R/W SEC 34 OF IPC PENDING BEFORE THE I ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.
00007/2023 OF HALASUR GATE POLICE STATION) ANNEXURE-
E IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. Accused No.5 in CC.No.31900/2023 pending before the Court of I Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.7/2023 registered by Halasuru Gate Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 506, 364A, 504, 323, 324 read with Section 34 of IPC, is before this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings as against him in the aforesaid case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.2 jointly submit that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled. Respondent No.2 is the employee of petitioner herein and even as on this day, -3- NC: 2024:KHC:12740 WP No. 8253 of 2024 respondent No.2 is working with petitioner. They submit that the petitioner and respondent No.2 at the intervention of elders and well wishers have decided to approach this Court with a prayer to permit them to compound the offences for which petitioner has been charge sheeted. They submit that the application is supported by Joint Affidavit of the parties and the settlement reported is voluntary and without there being any undue influence or coercion.
4. Learned HCGP however opposes the petition. He submits that charge sheet has been filed for non-compoundable offences. Serious allegations are made against accused Nos.1 to 5 and therefore, prayer made in the petition cannot be granted.
5. From a perusal of the allegations found in the first information as well as in the charge sheet, it is seen that accused Nos.1 to 4 had some business transaction with respondent No.2/victim and on 05.01.2023 at about 11.00 a.m., they had come to show room of the petitioner and requested him to send out victim/CW1 along with them since they intended to talk to him. Accordingly, petitioner herein had -4- NC: 2024:KHC:12740 WP No. 8253 of 2024 sent victim/CW1 along with accused Nos.1 to 4, who allegedly took CW1 along with them forcibly in a motor bike. Except the said allegation, there is no other allegation found against the petitioner either in the first information or in the charge sheet.
6. The parties have now approached this Court by filing application I.A.No.1/2024 under Section 482 read with Section 320 of Cr.P.C. which is supported by Joint Affidavit of the parties. In paragraph Nos.2 to 4 of the application, it is stated as follows:-
"2. The Petitioner is the owner of Samarth Dye Hub, and the 2nd Respondent is an employee of the said institution and works as a ornament maker. They have always been cordial to each other and the 2nd Respondent had not filed any complaint against the Petitioner. The 2nd Respondent is at a loss to understand as to why the 1st Respondent Police filed a charge sheet against the Petitioner, who had no role whatsoever, to play in the offences committed by the accused Nos. 1 to 4. Further, the 2nd Respondent reiterates that he had not filed any complaint against the Petitioner and neither was he informed or intimated that the 1st respondent police have filed a charge sheet against the Petitioner.-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:12740 WP No. 8253 of 2024
3. The Petitioner and 2nd Respondent state that with the intervention and advice of the family members, relatives, colleagues and friends of both the parties, the 2nd Respondent is not willing to prosecute the Petitioner for the said offences alleged to have been committed by him. Now having realized that criminal proceedings are pending against the Petitioner, on the basis of his information, he is no longer interested in prosecuting the case against the Petitioner and has no objections to get the proceedings in C.C. No. 31900/2023 (Crime No. 7/2023 of Halasoorugate Police Station) pending consideration on the file of the learned 1 Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Bangalore, quashed in so far as the Petitioner is concerned.
4. The Petitioner and 2nd Respondent state that though the offences. under section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code is non bailable and the maximum imprisonment prescribed is either death or imprisonment for life, the said offence is not pertaining to the Petitioner as he was not involved either directly or indirectly, in the said offences. Further, the offence under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, though non bailable and non compoundable the parties are requesting this Hon'ble Court to compound the offences and quash the proceedings in so far as the Petitioner is concerned."-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:12740 WP No. 8253 of 2024
7. In paragraph Nos.2 to 4 of the affidavit filed by respondent No.2/victim, it is stated as follows:-
"2. I state that the Petitioner is the owner of Samarth Dye Hub where i work as a Ornament worker, I state that I have never intended to initiate proceedings against the Petitioner and am a loss to understand how and why he has been implicated in the present proceedings.
3. I state that it is only with the help of the Petitioner that I could initiate proceedings against the other Accused persons and it is only because of his support and guidance that I have wriggled out safely out of the entire incident.
4. I state that I have always been cordial with the Petitioner and the Petitioner has not harmed me or affected me in any manner and that he has been falsely implicated in the impugned proceedings as I have never intended to initiated any proceedings against him."
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Another vs. State Of Madhya Pradesh reported in AIR 2022 (14) SCC 531, has observed that notwithstanding the -7- NC: 2024:KHC:12740 WP No. 8253 of 2024 limitation provided under Section 320 of Cr.P.C., the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and quash criminal proceedings even if it registered for non-compoundable offences depending upon the nature of allegations found against accused, his conduct and also the nature of settlement arrived at between the parties.
9. In the case on hand, except the allegation that the petitioner who is the owner of the show room in which victim is working had sent the victim out of the show room and asked him to accompany accused Nos.1 to 4, there is no other allegation as against petitioner herein. Respondent No.2 is said to be working with petitioner even as on this day. They both have approached this Court with a prayer to permit them to compound the offences. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where this Court is required to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for the purpose of doing complete justice to the parties. Accordingly, the following order:-
10. Criminal Petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in CC.No.31900/2023 pending before the Court of I Addl. Chief -8- NC: 2024:KHC:12740 WP No. 8253 of 2024 Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.7/2023 registered by Halasuru Gate Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 506, 364A, 504, 323, 324 read with Section 34 of IPC is quashed, as against the petitioner herein.
11. Pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE DN