Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Azeem Pasha vs State Of Karnataka on 4 July, 2023
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4339 OF 2023
BETWEEN
1 . MOHAMMED AZEEM PASHA
S/O MOHAMMED SARDAR
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NO 32, 12TH CROSS,
1ST MAIN, K G HALLI
BANGALORE - 560045
2 . MOHAMMED ABUBACKER
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
S/O MOHAMMED HIDAYATH
R/AT NO 224,
11TH CROSS, MEHABOOB LAYOUT,
GOVINDAPURA
BANGALORE - 560045
3 . GAIBAN KHAN
S/O APANALLA KHAN
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT RML NAGARA SHIMOGGA
KARNATAKA - 577201
4 . SHAFEEQUDDIN SHARIFF
S/O SHERIFF
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
BANGALORE CITY
KARNATAKA
ALSO RESIDES AT R/AT NO 65,
3RD CROSS,
DINNUR MAIN ROAD,
AKKAMMA LAYOUT
2
BANGALORE NORTH,
R T NAGAR POST
BANGALORE - 560032
... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY R T NAGAR P.S.
REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560001
2 . SMT RABIA SULTANA
W/O NAVAZUDDIN SHARIFF
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
NO 19, 6TH CROSS,
ATHAMANANDA COLONY
SULTANA PALYA,
R T NAGAR
BENGALURU - 32
FLAT NO.102,
PROPERTY NO 248,
BRUNDAVAN ELITE APARTMENT,
3RD MAIN ROAD,
PANDURANGA NAGAR,
J P NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560078
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.D. RENUKARADHYA, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.23/2023 (CRIME NO.226/2022) FOR ALLEGED
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 75 OF JUVENILE
JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT 2015
AND UNDER SECTION 498A, 506, 323, 354 OF IPC REGISTERED
BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE I.E. R.T. NAGAR POLICE STATION
PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONBLE 32ND ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, BANGALORE.
3
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 28.6.2023, THIS DAY, THE COURT
MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 5, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing the criminal proceedings in CC.No.23/2023 arising out of crime NO.226/2022, registered by the R.T.Nagar police station for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 506, 323, 354 of IPC and Section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act (Care and Protection of Children Act) (herein referred as JJ Act.), 2015.
2. Heard the argument of learned counsel for petitioners, learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent No.2 filed complaint before the RT Nagar police alleging that the accused No.1 (accused No.1 is not the petitioner herein) Nawazuddin Shariff said to be torturing the complainant physically and mentally and also her 4 daughter. She has already filed complaint against him and also a maintenance case has been filed against him which were pending. Also, there was a protection order passed by the Magistrate under the DV Act, not to dispossess the complainant and her daughter, from the house at RT Nagar. However, when she went to RT Nagar police station on 8.8.2022 to lodge complaint against the petitioners and accused No.1, they registered NCR case and when she came back to the house, at that time the accused persons dispossessed the complainant from the house and also thrown the minor daughter from the house by assaulting her physically and mentally. It is also stated that they also mis-behaved with her daughter and when the complainant questioned the accused, they also abused her in filthy language. The accused persons also dismantled the CCTV footage inside the building. The accused persons also took away all the materials kept in the house and robbed the cash, gold and also silver. After registering the FIR the police took up the investigation and 5 filed the charge sheet. The petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 5 herein challenged the charge sheet.
4. The learned counsel for petitioner has contended that the petitioners have nothing to do with the family affairs of the complainant. The petitioner No.4 i.e, accused No.5 purchased the property from the accused No.1 through the petitioner No.1/accused No.2 through GPA holder for valuable consideration. The respondent No.2 already filed a suit for seeking injunction. She has already filed a 498A case against the accused No.1 husband which is pending. The accused Nos.3 and 5 are cousin brothers, they have nothing to do with the family dispute of accused No.1 and respondent No.2. There is no ingredients to attract any of the provisions, hence prayed for quashing the proceedings. It is also contended that the accused No.1 and respondent No.2 have already filed divorce petition before the family court for mutual divorce which is pending. The accused No.1 undertakes to gift the property to the daughter. The said property is situated at Devanahalli but without giving property to the complainant 6 he has sold the house property to accused No.3 and thrown the complainant and her daughter from the house. Hence prayed for allowing the petition.
5. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 has filed statement of objection and it is contended that the petitioners harassed the minor daughter by colluding with the accused No.1. The accused No.1 caused grievous injury to her during their stay in Japan. At that time, a case was registered against him and the accused No.1 had agreed to execute gift deed in favour of the daughter, but in order to cheat the complainant he has sold the property to the accused No.3 in respect of Devanahalli property. A criminal case also filed against accused No.1 under the DV Act. Also, there was an order to pay monthly maintenance and education fees which was not complied by him. The accused No.1 along with the petitioners trespassed into the house, assaulted her daughter, and also mis-behaved with them. There is a mutual divorce case which is pending, and the accused No.1 had paid Rs.20 lakhs which is kept in 7 Life Insurance of the accused No.1 in the name of the child and he has agreed to execute gift deed in favour of the daughter but it was not done. Therefore prayed for dismissing the petition.
6. Learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State also objected the petition.
7. Having heard the arguments perused the records, which reveals there was a matrimonial dispute between the respondent No.2 and her husband, the accused No.1, she has already filed a case for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC which is pending and there was a protection order in favour of this respondent No.2. Inspite of the same, the accused No.1 sold the property to the accused No.3 who is GPA holder of accused No.5 and they are all friends. The sale was made only in order to dispossess respondent No.2 from the shared house. She also filed a civil suit against the petitioners which is pending.
8
8. It is also an admitted fact, a suit was filed by accused No.1 and respondent No.2 for mutual divorce where the accused No.1 undertakes to execute the gift deed in favour of the daughter and also in respect of Devanahalli property. The divorce case is still pending, the accused No.1 has not complied the agreement and in the meanwhile the accused No.1 has sold the property to these petitioners and thrown out the complainant from the house, inspite of the stay order which is still operating and directing not to dispossess the respondent No.2. Taking advantage of sale deed, these accused persons thrown out all the articles from the house and they have mis-behaved with the daughter of the complainant, when she was in the house. If at all the accused persons had purchased the property they shall dispossess the complainant from the said property by due process of law and until she has vacated, she cannot be dispossess. When the divorce case is still pending the accused No.1 to comply his part of duties by executing gift deed in favour of the child, he could not have sold the property to these petitioners and 9 these petitioners are the relatives of accused No.1 and with intention to harass the complainant they have purchased the property and dispossessing the complainant even though a protection order was operating against the accused No.1. Ofcourse that she has already filed case under Section 498A of IPC which is pending against accused No.1 but misbehaving with the child which attracts the offence under Section the aforementioned JJ Act and outraging the modesty, destroying the articles kept in the house, all these attracts, section 354, 323, 506, 427 of IPC. The section 498A of IPC may be attracted against accused No.1 but he has not approached this court. Therefore, at this stage the court cannot quash the criminal proceeding against them, they are all witnesses spoken about the harassment. There is a wound certificate belonging to respondent No.2 and daughter. Therefore, it is prima facie material placed on record to frame the charges.
10
Therefore this court not inclined to interfere in respect of cognizance taken by the Magistrate. Hence, the petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE AKV