Karnataka High Court
Joseph Chacko vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 September, 2022
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5165 OF 2022
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5133 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5142 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5164 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5182 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5308 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5312 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5314 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5315 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5336 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5362 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5363 OF 2022
Digitally signed by
PADMAVATHI B K CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5966 OF 2022
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5967 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5968 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5969 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5970 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5971 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5972 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5974 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5975 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5976 OF 2022
-2-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5977 OF 2022
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6415 OF 2022
IN CRL.P.NO.5165/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/A 176/VB, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYANA NAGAR POST
BENGALURU 560043.
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/A 176/B PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGRA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU 560043.
3. D MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED 62 YEARS
NO 7/36, 4TH CROSS
HENNUR CROSS ROAD
BENGALURU 560043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKOA
GED 30 YEASRR/AT 176/B
PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
-3-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU 560043
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SANJDESH J CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY KOTHANUR PS
THROUGH THE STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU 560001.
2. MARIYA KUTTY OLIAPURAM
W/O ROY SEBASTIAN OLIAPURAM
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
PLOT NO 156 AND 156A
SY 203/2009, AT ATHENA
1ST DODDAGUBBI GRAMA THANA
BIDARAHALL HOBLI
ATTINA TOWNSHIP
BANGLAORE SOUTH TALUK
PERMANANAT R/O RAMALLOORE
KOTHAMANGALAM
ERNAKULAM, KERALA-686666
REP BY GPA HOLDER
DR. VARGHESE PAUL
PALAMATTAM.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY.,ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-4-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO a) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
01.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN PCR NO.
53433/2022 PRODUCED HERE TO AS ANNEXURE A AND ETC.
IN CRL.P.5133/2022
BETWEEN
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/A 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560043.
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/A 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560043
3. D MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
NO.7/36
4TH CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU-560043
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
-5-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
R/A 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J CHOTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P S
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560001.
2. K T JACOB @ JACOB PANICKER
S/O K C THOMAS
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
PLOT NO.53, KHATA NO.199
DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
ATTINA TOWNSHIP
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
PERMANET R/O 3B WINSOR MANSION
PURAVANKONAM
KAVADIYAR PO TRIVENDRUM
KERALA-695003.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP. FOR R1,
SRI NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADV. FOR R2)
-6-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
01.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN PCR
NO.53434/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A AND
ETC.
IN CRL.P.5142/2022
BETWEEN:
1 . JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560043.
2 . SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560043.
3 . D MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4TH CROSS
HENNUR CROSS ROAD
BENGALURU-560043.
4 . ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
-7-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.SHAKEER ABBAS M, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P S
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560001.
2. MRS. MARRY PHILIP
W/O V J PHILIP
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS
PLOT NO.73, KHATA NO.198
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O NATIONAL EMPRESS
GARDEN APARTMENT AND VILLAS
TOWER-2, FLAT NO.505
HIGH SCHOOL ROAD
ERNAKULAM, KERALA-682028
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
DR.VARGHESE PAUL POLAMOTTAM.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP. FOR R1:
-8-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
01.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ACMM, BANGALORE IN
PCR.NO.53430/2022 PRODUCED HERETO A ANNEXURE-A.
B. QUASH ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN PCR.NO.53430/2022
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XI ACMM, BANGALORE AND
ETC.
IN CRL.P.5164/2022
BETWEEN:
1 . JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU -560 043.
2 . SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU -560 043.
3 . D MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36 4TH CROSS
HENNUR CROSS ROAD
BENGALURU -560 043.
-9-
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
4 . ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT 176/B PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU -560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SANDESH J CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY KOTHANUR P S
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU -560 001.
2. IPE GEORGE IRIMPAN
W/O EA GEORGE
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
PLOT NO.152 ABD 152-A
SY NO. 203/210
DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
ATTINA TOWNSHIP
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O
IRIMPAN HOUSE POOVARTHUSHERY
PARAKKADAVU ERNAKULAM
KERALA-683579
REP BY GPA HOLDER DR.VARGHESH
PAUL PALAMATTAM.
- 10 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP. FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCTE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
01.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ACMM, BANGALORE IN
PCR.NO.53436/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A AND
ETC.
IN CRL.P.5182/2022
BETWEEN:
1 . JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O. LATE P. J. CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 043.
2 . SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O. LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O. JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B,
PARK AVENUE,
HORAMAVU AGARA,
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU-560 043.
3 . D. MANUEL
S/O. LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
- 11 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
NO. 7/36, 4TH CROSS
HENNUR CROSS ROAD
BENGALURU-560 043.
4 . ANIL CHACKO
S/O. JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT NO. 176/B,
PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.,
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. SARAMMA WILSON
W/O. WILSON JOSEPH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
PLOT NO. 74
KHATHA NO. 198
DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
ATTINA TOWNSHIP
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O. PUTHANVEEDU
- 12 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
KOCHIKKAL,MAVEILIKARA, P.O.
KERALA-690 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP. FOR R2:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO I) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
01.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN PCR NO.
53435/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE A.
II) QUASH ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN PCR NO.
53435/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XI ADDITIONAL
CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU.
IN CRL.P.5308/2022
BETWEEN:
1 . JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O. LATE P. J. CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 043.
2 . SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O. LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O. JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 043.
- 13 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
3 . D. MANUEL
S/O. LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO. 7/36, 4TH CROSS
HENNUR CROSS ROAD
BENGALURU-560 043.
4 . ANIL CHACKO
S/O. JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT NO. 176/B
PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.,
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. KURUVILLA VARGHESE
S/O. KURUVILLA CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
PLOT NO. 140
KHATHA NO. 199
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
- 14 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O.
POOKETHU VADAKETHIL
PATHINANTHITTA DISTRICT
KERALA-689 645,
REP BY GPA HOLDER
DR. VARGHES APUL PALAMATTAM
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSEDBY THE XI ACMM, BANGALORE IN
PCR.NO.53557/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-AAND
ETC.
IN CRL.P.5312/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
- 15 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
3. D. MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4th CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. ELVEERA MARY ROSARIO
W/O LEO ROSARIO
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
PLOT NO. 165, KHATA NO.199
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
- 16 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O
NEAR ELATHUR SCHOOL
P.O. KINNIGOILI,
D.K - 574 150.
REP. BY GPA HOLDER DR. VARGHES PAUL,
PALAMATTAM
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.53490/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.5314/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
- 17 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
3. D. MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4th CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. ALEXANDER VARGHESE
S/O LATE MATHUNNI VARGHESE
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
PLOT NO.145, KHATA NO.200
- 18 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O
KALANGUTHU HOUSE
KOIPURAM POST, PATTANAMTHITTA
KERALA - 689 645
REP BY GPA HOLDER DR VARGHESE PAUL
PALAMATTAM
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.53488/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.5315/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
- 19 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
3. D. MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4th CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SHRINE MATHEW
S/O MATHEW VILAPARAMPIL PAPPY
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
- 20 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
PLOT NO.54, KHATA NO.199
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TAKLUK
PERMANENT R/O CILAPARAMPIL HOUSE
MEZHUVIL, TINUMPAMAN NORTH
PATTANAMTHITTA
KERALA - 689 645
REP BY GPA HOLDER DR VARGHESE PAUL
PALAMATTAM
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.53489/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.5336/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
ATHENA TOWNSHIP 01,
DODDAGUBBI, BENGALURU EAST
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU.
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
BENGALURU - 560 043.
- 21 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA.
BENGALURU - 560 043.
3. D. MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4th CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
- 22 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
2. SONIA NATESAN
S/O M.R.NATESAN
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
PLOT NO.66, KHATA NO.196
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O NO.302, ACME HARMONY
NEAR ONCG COLONY
OFF JOGESHWARIVIKHROLL LINK ROAD
ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI - 400 093.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.53489/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.5362/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
- 23 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
3. D. MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4th CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
- 24 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
2. KURIAN MAMMEN
S/O LATE KURIAN MAMMEN
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
PLOT NO.141, KHAT NO.199
SITUATED AT DODDAGUBBI GRAMATHANA
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PERMANENT R/O
KOALMKUZHIYIL KURIAN VILLA
VAZHAPADI, THAZHEKARE
MAVELIKARA, KERALA - 690 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.53561/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.5363/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. SHEBA ELIZABETH JOHNEY
D/O LATE JOHNEY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
C/O JOSEPH CHACKO
- 25 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
3. D. MANUEL
S/O LATE DEVDAS
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.7/36, 4th CROSS,
HENNUR CROSS ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. ANIL CHACKO
S/O JOSEPH CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. JESSY CHERIAN
S/O CHERIAN A. VARGHESE,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
- 26 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
PLOT NO.144, KHATA NO.200,
SITUATED AT DODAGUBBI GRAMATHANA,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
PERMANENT R/O 4D, NEELIMA CLASSICS,
KANJI KUAZIMUTTAMBALAM P.O.,
KOTTAYAM, KERALA 686 001.
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
DR. VARGHES PAUL PALAMATTAM.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
04.06.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.53487/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P.5966 /2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
- 27 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYAN NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54024/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
- 28 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.5967/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
- 29 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54021/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.5968/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
- 30 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54019/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
- 31 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
IN CRL.P.5969/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
- 32 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54023/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.5970/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
- 33 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
ALSO R/AT
GOLDEN SUFARM CHAGLAT, BAGALURU
BENGALURU - 562 149.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY K.R.PURAM POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.173/2022 OF K.R.PURAM P.S.,
REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 447, 504, 506, 419,
420, 465, 471, 384 R/W 34 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE X
ACMM, MAYOHALL, BANGALORE AND ALLOW THIS PETITION.
- 34 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
IN CRL.P.5971/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
- 35 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54025/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.5972/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
- 36 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54017/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
- 37 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
IN CRL.P.5974/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
- 38 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54018/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.5975/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
- 39 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54026/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
- 40 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
IN CRL.P.5976/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
- 41 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54022/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
IN CRL.P.5977/2022
BETWEEN:
1. DR.VARGHESE PAUL PALAMATTAM
S/O PAUL VARGHESE PALAMATTAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
PALAMATTAM HOUSE
DONBOSCO ROAD, KRIACHIRA, THRISSUR
KERALA STATE - 680 006.
2. SRI ABRAHAM THOMAS
S/O THOMAS ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
RESIDING AT THEVIRATHU
CHARIVUKALAYIL
KURICHIPANDARAKALAM HOUSE
- 42 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
ATHIRAMAPUZHA, MUNDUVELIPADI
KERALA STATE - 689 532.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
BABUSA PALYA
KALYANA NAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 043.
2. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KOTHANUR POLICE STATION
BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
((BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)
SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 14.06.2022
PASSED IN P.C.R.NO.54020/2022 BY THE XI ADDL.C.M.M.,
BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448, 420, 465, 467,
468, 471, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC.
- 43 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
IN CRL.P.6415/2022
BETWEEN:
1. JOSEPH CHACKO
S/O LATE P.J CHACKO
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 176/B, PARK AVENUE
HORAMAVU AGARA
KALYAN NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SHAKEER ABBAS M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY KOTHANUR P.S.
THROUGH THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
STATE OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. RATHNAPPA MABEN
S/O SILAS MABEN
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS
R/AT SILA SANJEEVI
KOPPAL THOTA, MALPE
UDUPI - 576 118
REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER
SRI SANTHOSH SANJITH MABEN
S/O RATHNAPPA MABEN
R/AT SILA SANJEEVI, KOPPAL THOTA
MALPE, UDUPI - 576 118.
...RESPONDENTS
- 44 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODA, HCGP., FOR R1:
SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 )
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION.482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO A. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
17.03.2022 PASSED BY THE XI ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU IN
P.C.R.NO.50932/2022 PRODUCED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-A
AND ETC.,
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
These petitions involve complaints registered by the petitioners which are referred to as first batch of cases and complaints registered by the respondents referred to as other batch of cases, pending on the file of XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. Since cases and counter cases are registered against each other, they are connected, taken and disposed by this common order.
2. Brief facts that leads the parties to this Court in the subject petitions are as follows:
First batch of petitions:
- 45 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS Crl.P.Nos.5165/2022, 5133/2022, 5142/2022, 5164/2022, 5182/2022, 5308/2022, 5312/2022, 5314/2022, 5315/2022, 5336/2022, 5362/2022, 5363/2022 and 6415/2022 These are the petitions filed by one Joseph Chacko and others, against a private complaint so registered by the complainant, seeking quashment of proceedings in PCR Nos.53433/2022, 53434/2022, 53430/2022, 53436/2022, 53435/2022,53557/2022, 53490/2022, 53488/2022, 53489/2022, 53486/2022, 53561/2022, 53487/2022, and 50932/2022. The complainant invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. registers a private complaint in the afore-said cases alleging that the petitioners have indulged in certain acts which would become offences punishable under Sections 323, 448, 420, 468, 471 and 506(B) of the IPC.
The crux of the allegation of the complainant as could be gathered from the private complaint is that the petitioners wanting to disturb the peaceful possession of the complainant have indulged in acts of assault, house trespass and other allied offences. The matters having been referred for its
- 46 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., drives the petitioners to this Court in the first batch of petitions. Second Batch of Petitions:
Crl.P.Nos.5966/2022, 5967/2022, 5968/2022, 5969/2022, 5970/2022, 5971/2022, 5972/2022, 5974/2022, 5975/2022, 5976/2022 and 5977/2022 Second batch of petitions arise out of complaints registered by Joseph Chacko and others in PCR Nos.54024/2022, 54021/2022, 54019/2022, 54023/2022, Crime No.173/2022 pending before X ACMM, Bangalore (Crl.P.5970/2022), 54025/2022, 54017/2022, 54018/2022, 54026/2022, 54022/2022 and 54020/2022 for offences punishable under Sections 448, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and other offences against the complainant on several incidents as have been narrated in the said private complaints.
3. Heard the learned senior counsel Sri.Sandesh J Chouta appearing for the petitioners in the first batch of petitions and Sri.Nishit Kumar Shetty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in the second batch of petitions and
- 47 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent/State.
4. A perusal at the complaints so registered against the petitioners and the respondents would indicate that there are several disputes between the two. It is also the submission of the learned senior counsel Sri.Sandesh J Chouta that civil disputes galore between the parties and therefore, the allegations are every now and then made with regard to trespass, forgery or cheating, by registering multiple complaints either before jurisdictional police or invoking Section 200 of the Cr.P.C.
5. Learned senior counsel would further submit that about 139 cases between the petitioners and other house owners who were Non-Resident Indians were quashed by this Court by orders passed on two dates one in Crl.P.No.5655/2016 & connected matters disposed on 22.2.2017 and the other batch in Crl.P.No.7366/2013 & connected matters disposed on 28.09.2016 and would submit that the issue being purely civil in nature is sought to be given a colour of crime, is what is held
- 48 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS by the Co-ordinate Bench while disposing the aforesaid cases between the two.
6. Learned counsel Sri.Nishit Kumar Shetty would also toe the lines insofar as the submission with regard to the earlier cases pending and disposed at the hands of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record.
8. The afore-narrated facts or the narration in the complaints of both the petitioners and the respondents against each other are not in dispute. Learned senior counsel has placed on record a flow chart with regard to the civil proceedings pending between the parties inter se. The total number of civil suits filed against Joseph Chacko are 12 in number and they are as follows:
1. O.S.No.1123/2022 2. O.S.No.1125/2022- 49 -CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022
AND CONNECTED MATTERS 3. O.S.No.1127/2022 4. O.S.No.1129/2022 5. O.S.No.1137/2022 6. O.S.No.1139/2022 7. O.S.No.1141/2022 8. O.S.No.1143/2022 9. O.S.No.1145/2022 10.O.S.No.1147/2022 11.O.S.No.1149/2022 12.O.S.No.1151/2022 The cases filed by Joseph Chacko against the complainant and others are 5 in number and they are as follows:1. O.S.No.4517/2017 2. O.S.No.90/2020 3. O.S.No.595/2022 4. O.S.No.598/2022 5. O.S.No.611/2022
9. It is an admitted fact that civil proceedings galore between the very same parties of the subject lis. It is germane to notice the reasons rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench while allowing the petitions filed by both the petitioners and the complainants herein in Crl.P.No.5655/2016 & connected cases disposed on 22.2.2017. This forms one batch of petitions disposed on 22.2.2017 wherein the Co-ordinate Bench
- 50 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS considering the entire spectrum of the dispute between the parties has held as follows:
".... .... ....
2. The facts and circumstances are almost identical in each case as would be evident from the particulars furnished. The only distinguishing feature is that in some of these cases the petitioner had filed applications under Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr.P.C.', for brevity) before the trial court which have been uniformly dismissed and those orders have been confirmed in revision petitions filed under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. However, the petitioner has invoked Section 482 Cr.P.C. in filing these petitions before this court and hence all the petitions, including the petitions which are filed even at the initial stage of the proceedings before the trial court, are considered together for the sake of convenience and to avoid prolixity without however, jeopardizing the consideration of the merits of the case as canvassed by both sides.
3. The facts briefly stated are as follows. The first petitioner is said to be a real estate and land developer. He is said to have developed residential layouts in and around Bangalore city for the last several decades. He is said to have marketed the lands so developed and had clients in India and abroad. The areas around Bangalore City in which he had formed residential layouts included areas such as Yerrappana halli, Bendiganahalli,Doddanallurahalli, Kylasanahalli, Byrathi, Doddagubbi & Bileshivale, etc. It is the claim of the petitioner that in almost all cases he had purchased the lands free from encumbrances and had thereafter developed the same. The several townships said to have been developed were given exotic names such as Ashiana, Elysium, Athena Heavens, Gracia Greens, Planet Regency & West Avenue Fields.
The residential plots so formed are said to have been sold to many non-resident Indians who are said to
- 51 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS have purchased the same under Sale deeds duly registered in their favour. Approximately about 1500 sale deeds are said to have been executed between the period 1994 to 1998 with prices of the residential plots ranging from Rs.55,000/- to Rs.2 lakh.
It is alleged that one George Verghese had purchased a plot of land in one of the residential layouts formed by the first petitioner. He is then said to have approached the petitioner claiming that he was unemployed and had sought employment under the petitioner. It is claimed that he was appointed by the petitioner as a caretaker of the several residential layouts formed by him. It is further alleged that after such engagement, the said Verghese had joined hands with one Shanker Reddy and had hatched a conspiracy to deprive the petitioner, as according to the petitioner - and as deduced by him later, Shanker Reddy and his uncle one Ramamurthy had noticed that several plots of land sold to NRI's were lying vacant and they were interested in purchasing the same and had been pressurizing the petitioner to sell the same to them. But however the petitioner had pointed out that it was not in his hands to sell the same. But it is claimed that Verghese who was privy to the entire data base of the petitioner's clientele had misused the same along with Shanker Reddy and Murthy and others including the partners and agents of one M/s City Scape Properties are said to have illegally occupied one of the townships formed by the petitioner and planted bill boards announcing that the said property had been sold by the petitioner to them. Thereafter, it is claimed, that the said parties with the active connivance of Verghese had contacted the NRI's who had purchased plots from the petitioner in the said township and informed them that the plots could not have been sold to them as there was a defect in title and are said to have offered to purchase the same and are said to have suggested that criminal cases be filed against the petitioner. It is claimed that the petitioner who belatedly became aware of this diabolic plot, is said to have issued public notices denying the claims of City Scape Properties.
But it is stated that Verghese had obtained permission from a large number of NRI's to file criminal
- 52 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS complaints on their behalf against the petitioner. And hence about 137 identical criminal complaints were said to have been filed over the years. Of these cases, 93 cases have either been settled amicably between the parties or the same have been disposed of on the ground that unless the subsisting sale deeds were set at naught, no criminality could be attached to it by third parties who had claimed fraud on the part of the petitioner. These petitions pertain to the remaining 44 cases.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that George Verghese and others associated with M/s City Scape properties had embarked on a sustained stratagem to usurp the lands in a particular township developed by the petitioner and in pursuance of the same - Verghese is said to have filed a civil suit in OS 392 / 2007 wherein he had mischievously alleged that the petitioner along with Shanker Reddy and one Mohan Kumar had trespassed on the suit property, which was incidentally a township said to have been developed by the petitioner, and razed it to the ground in demolishing compound walls around vacant sites and effacing boundary marks. This was in February 2007. The said Reddy and Kumar are said to have entered appearance in the suit and are said to have filed a joint written Statement to the effect that they had no objection for possession to be delivered to Verghese. The petitioner is also said to have filed his written statement in the suit, highlighting the collusion between Verghese and the others. It transpires that the trial court rejected the prayer for temporary injunction on a consideration of the pleadings and the suit has been abandoned for all purposes.
Thereafter, Verghese is said to have entered into an agreement of sale in respect of the very land with one Channakeshava and Muniraju for a price of Rs.1.35 crore per acre. Shanker Reddy is said to be the witness to the agreement, which is another instance of the fraudulent motives of the said parties that the petitioner seeks to highlight.
As a result of the sustained campaign carried out by Verghese in misinforming purchasers of plots of land from the petitioner, who were all residing abroad and were
- 53 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS dependant on remote information as to the status of their property were said to have been prompted to file criminal cases against the petitioner and that Verghese had even prepared stereotyped complaints which began to be filed by him on behalf of those persons, against the petitioner. Apart from this Verghese is said to have convinced a large number of such non-resident plot owners living abroad to authorize him and one Muniraju to act on their behalf to approach revenue authorities to seek change of mutation entries and to perform other acts in respect of their properties. Shanker Reddy was said to be a witness to the agreement so entered into.
It further transpires that the said Verghese and others had proceeded to obtain General Power of Attorney from the erstwhile land owners who had sold the lands in question to the petitioner and had them registered in Gudibanda, Chikkaballapur District, since the local Sub- Registrar had been intimated in writing of such possible fraud by Verghese and others. And on the basis of the said GPA's and taking advantage of the fact that mutation entries continued in the name of the erstwhile land owners had proceeded to convey the same lands already sold by the petitioner.
5. In the above background it is contended that the complainants in every single complaint are not alleging that the sale deed in their favour in respect of particular plots of land is a forgery or a got up document. There is no denial of the same being a registered document. In which event any assertion as to the dimension, location or other lacuna as to title to the property involved would necessarily have to be agitated in an appropriate civil court and cannot be the subject matter of a criminal proceeding. In other words, it is contended that if once it is adjudicated before a civil court and demonstrated that the petitioner had sought to convey a title which he did not possess and that this was to his knowledge, it is possible that he may also be prosecuted in criminal law. However, the present proceedings would necessarily require the criminal court to enquire
- 54 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS into the title to the property to proceed further in addressing the validity or otherwise of the sale transaction in question. This, it is contended, is without the jurisdiction of the criminal court.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would further point out that a large number of petitions by this very petitioner along with others have been allowed on the very ground urged above as per Order dated 25.10.2016 in Criminal Petition 4081/2013 and connected cases by this very Bench. And hence seeks that these petitions may also be allowed on the same token of reasoning.
6. On the other hand the learned counsel for the private respondents vehemently oppose the petitions.
7. Incidentally, in the course of these proceedings an attempt was made at an amicable settlement, in ensuring that each of the respondent land holders be put in possession of an extent of land corresponding to what has been purchased by each of them in the property said to have been developed by the petitioner. Or in the alternative for the petitioner to buy back the land covered under their respective sale deeds. After a sustained effort, with the appointment of a court commissioner and the assistance of the Revenue authorities the proposals came to naught.
It is the strong contention of the private respondents that the sale deeds executed in their favour are fraudulent for more than one reason. It is pointed out that firstly, that the same are unilateral. In that, they are executed and registered by the petitioner without the purchaser or any representative being present. Secondly, the description of the property is vague and in fact is in respect of non-existent or property which cannot be identified with reference to metes and bounds. Thirdly, the petitioner was never the absolute owner of the property as claimed at the time of entering into an agreement of sale and it is found that he was merely a power of attorney holder for the actual owner. Fourthly,
- 55 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS the revenue authorities have confirmed that there are no such properties culled out from the agricultural land and the land originally identified by a survey number as agricultural land. And that the property sold to each of the petitioners is claimed to have been culled out from what was identified by a survey number as agricultural land but has been subsequently subjected to house property tax in distinct parcels, and no longer treated as agricultural land, which assertion is discovered to be false and misleading - as there are no official record available in this regard. The so called revenue records furnished to effect the sales are found to be false and forged. Fifthly, there is a serious dispute as regards title as third parties have opposed the entry of the private respondents on the land. Sixthly, the so called townships said to have been developed by the petitioner are non -existent and the land even today remains as vacant agricultural land without any development as a so called residential layout. There is no possibility of accommodating the so called sites depicted in a so called layout plan that was first disclosed in the land now sought to be shown, over which the said sites are said to have been formed. In that, going by the dimensions of the sites - there would be no land available to form common facilities such as roads and other infrastructure. It is also alleged that there may be lack of access to the property itself.
8. The learned counsel have placed reliance on a large number of decisions of the Apex court to contend that the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, can quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process of court or to secure ends of justice. This is when it is found that the allegations in the FIR or complaint do not disclose the commission of any offence - when even on face value the allegations are taken to be true and accurate, in entirety. And that this court ought not to embark upon appreciation of evidence but is to consider only the material on record to ascertain whether the allegations in the complaint fulfil the ingredients of the offences alleged. And though the dispute may be primarily of a civil nature that by itself would not be a ground to quash the criminal proceedings, for in cases of forgery and fraud there would always be
- 56 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS some aspects which would necessarily require to be addressed by a civil court alone.
It is contended that the present petitioners do not stand on the same footing as the petitioners whose petitions have already been disposed of by this court. Those petitioners were rank outsiders who were claiming under sale deeds executed in their favour by the erstwhile owners of the very same lands which had already been sold by the petitioner as a power of attorney holder and hence this court having held that unless the subsisting sale deeds were set at naught they could not allege criminality, would not apply to the petitions on hand. Hence, the learned counsel for the private respondents seek that the present petitions be dismissed in the above circumstances and having regard to the settled position of law.
9. On a close consideration of the material on record and the rival contentions it is to be noticed that none of the petitioners are claiming that the sale deeds in their favour are forged. These are registered documents. The same can be set at naught only in the manner known to law. Unless those documents are unsettled it would not be possible for the petitioners to hold the same and at the same time claim that they have been defrauded. If the criminal court should embark on an enquiry in this regard and hold on the basis of findings on allegations with regard to attendant material such as revenue records it would be converting itself into a hybrid 'civilo- criminal' court addressing issues which require adjudication of civil rights and disputes of a civil nature in ultimately holding that the sale deeds are fraudulent and hence null and void. This would in effect be a declaration as to title, or rather the lack of it. A criminal court cannot clothe itself with any such jurisdiction albeit in the exercise of examining allegations surrounding the sale deeds which are otherwise not denied as being duly registered documents.
While there can be no debate as to the observations by the Apex court that criminal
- 57 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS proceedings are maintainable notwithstanding the existence of elements which are purely of a civil nature in a given case, which is a general proposition. It is pertinent that the context be also taken into account. In law, the context matters most.
10. In the result, given that every single petitioner claims under a registered sale deed which is subsisting, the same cannot be wished away in claiming that the attendant records are non-existent and that it is a nullity. The criminal court would not be in a position to decide this core issue that would arise. In any event any decision cannot be permitted to have such a result on the sale deeds by a side-wind , as it were."
(Emphasis supplied) Earlier to the said disposal another batch of petitions were disposed between the same parties in Crl.P.No.7366/2013 & connected matters on 28.09.2016 wherein the reasons so rendered by the learned Co-ordinate Bench reads as follows:
".... .... ....
2. These petitions are filed by the accused in criminal petitions who are differently arrayed in the several complaints filed. However, the grievance of the complainants appears to be identical. The complainants are said to have purchased the lands described as sites bearing house list numbers of several villages in Hosakote, K.R.Puram and Dodda Gubbi villages. It transpires that the complainants had purchased the house sites through a general power of attorney holder of the original grantees and they were purportedly put in possession of the vacant sites. It is subsequently learnt by them that the house sites formed in the layout, were
- 58 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS no longer identifiable, as third parties had intervened and it is in retrospect they learnt that the accused have purchased the same under registered sale deeds in the face of the sale deeds in favour of the complainants and therefore they have alleged offences punishable under the various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC', for brevity) alleging fraud, forgery, trespass and criminal conspiracy and so on. The court below has, by a cryptic order, directed investigation by the jurisdictional Police under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'CrPC', for brevity). It is at that stage that the present petitions were filed and interim orders of stay were granted staying further proceedings.
3. At the outset, it is to be noticed that the allegations of forgery etc., in respect of the incidental documents pursuant to the registered sale deed in favour of the complainants could not be adjudicated in a criminal case, for the reason that unless the registered sale deed is cancelled and delivered up in terms of Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the same cannot be ignored. The court would not be in a position to proceed on the basis that the sale deeds set up by the complainants are void ab initio. This would again amount to a declaration by a criminal court that the sale is void, which is impermissible. Therefore, in the face of the registered sale deed, which the complainants may claim, was a subsequent conveyance and could not override their sale deeds, which is earlier in point of time, also cannot be readily accepted, since it is an admitted fact that the sale deeds in favour of the complainants is in respect of particular plots of land without reference to any survey number. Admittedly, the lands in question are not converted for non-agricultural purpose. In the face of the further circumstance that the sale deeds in favour of the petitioners herein are in respect of acreage of lands bearing survey numbers, the identity would be a serious matter to assume that the sites purchases by the complainants overlap the lands purchased by the petitioners. This is an area which requires to be
- 59 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS adjudicated by a civil court and in the absence of which, a criminal court would hardly be in a position to appreciate the premise under which the complaints are filed. Therefore, the complaints are premature and would lack the basic foundation to demonstrate that the sale deeds of the petitioners are void.
4. Hence, the remedy of the complainants would only be before a civil court, where they would be enabled to have the sale deeds of the petitioners declared as void, if it is their case that they are void and thereafter may pursue all consequential remedies of even criminal prosecution for having proceeded to lay claim to the lands under a void sale deed.
Consequently, the Magistrate having directed investigation by the Police, by a cryptic order, also cannot be sustained, for it is the law laid down by this court as well as the Supreme Court that even for purposes of directing investigation, there ought to be some application of mind not to the degree of taking cognizance of the case, but at least to decide that the matter requires investigation. Even on that ground, the order of the court below is not sustainable. In any event, since the complaint itself was not sustainable, before the court below in the circumstances which are not disputed, the petitions are summarily allowed. The proceedings initiated before the court below in each of these petitions are quashed."
(Emphasis supplied)
10. In the light of the reasons so rendered by the Co-
ordinate Bench as extracted hereinabove and the issue in the case at hand being identical to what this Court had held earlier, permitting further proceedings to continue against the
- 60 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS petitioners in the first batch and the respondents in the other batch of cases will be setting the criminal law in motion despite the fact of them being civil in nature by giving it a colour of crime and if permitted to continue, would become an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) Criminal Petitions are allowed.
(ii) Impugned proceedings pending against the
petitioners in PCR Nos.53433/2022,
53434/2022, 53430/2022, 53436/2022,
53435/2022,53557/2022, 53490/2022,
53488/2022, 53489/2022, 53486/2022,
53561/2022, 53487/2022, and 50932/2022 in the first batch of petitions and PCR Nos.
54024/2022, 54021/2022, 54019/2022, 54023/2022, Crime No.173/2022, 54025/2022, 54017/2022, 54018/2022, 54026/2022, 54022/2022 and 54020/2022 in the second
- 61 -
CRL.P No. 5165 of 2022AND CONNECTED MATTERS batch of petitions respectively, both pending before the XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, stands quashed.
Consequently, pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74