Karnataka High Court
Smt Priya Bhat vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 February, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:7039
CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9540 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. PRIYA BHAT
W/O SANDEEP NAYAK
D/O DEVADAS BHAT
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
C/OF NO.11-2(1), OPP MESKAM
JYOTHINAGAR, MOODABIDRI TALUK - 574 107
2. DEVADAS BHAT
S/O NARASHIMA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT NO.11-2(1), OPP MESKAM
JYOTHINAGAR, MOODABIDRI TALUK - 574 107
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M.R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MOODABIDRI POLICE STATION
Digitally signed MANGALURU CITY
by SWAPNA V
REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Location: high HIGH COURT BUILDING
court of
karnataka BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SRI. SANDEEP NAYAK
S/O LAKSHMAN NAYAK
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT SAMRUDHI
MAVINAKATTE SAMPIGE
PUTHIGE VILLAGE
MOODABIDRI TALUK - 574 227
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. K.P. YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1
SRI. P.P. HEDGE, SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. VENKATESH SOMAREDDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:7039
CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND CONTINUATION OF
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN CR.NO.118/2022 DATED 11.07.2022
FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.406, 420 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC
REGISTERED AND BEING INVESTIGATED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1
POLICE IN PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED 02.07.2022 PASSED BY
THE HONBLE TRIAL COURT IN PCR NO.22/2022.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA
ORAL ORDER
Petitioners being accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.118 of 2022 (PCR No.22 of 2022) of Moodabidre Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'), are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them.
2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 being the husband of accused No.1 filed the private complaint in PCR No.22 of 2022 on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Moodabidre alleging that he married accused No.1 on 23.10.2013 and had invested about Rs.60,00,000/- in various shares and mutual funds in the name of accused No.1. He has -3- NC: 2025:KHC:7039 CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022 also opened a locker in the joint name with accused No.1 in Canara Bank, Moodabidre and had kept valuables in it. Accused No.1 being the wife of the complainant and accused No.2 being the father of accused No.1 have withdrawn the valuables from the joint locker and accused No.1 sold the shares and mutual funds standing in her name and committed criminal breach of trust, cheated the complainant and thereby committed the offences as stated above.
3. Learned Magistrate referred the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the FIR in Crime No. 118 of 2022 of Moodabidre Police Station came to be registered. The investigation was undertaken. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings.
4. Heard Sri M R Balakrishna, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt K P Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri P P Hegde, learned senior advocate for Sri Venkatesh Somareddi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the materials on record. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC:7039 CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022
5. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them?"
My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative' for the following:
REASONS
6. It is the contention of respondent No.2 that accused No.1 is his wife. They married on 23.10.2013. Accused No.2 is the father of accused No.1. After the marriage, respondent No.2 out of love and affection, invested Rs.60,00,000/- in various shares and mutual funds in the name of accused No.1, which she sold without informing respondent No.2. The second allegation is that respondent No.2 had opened the joint locker in his name along with accused No.1 in Canara Bank, Moodabidre Branch and kept the jewels in it. Taking advantage of the fact that the locker was standing jointly in the name of accused No.1, she managed to open the locker and took out -5- NC: 2025:KHC:7039 CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022 the valuables. Therefore, it is stated that the accused have committed criminal breach of trust and cheating.
7. It is a matter of fact that the relationship between respondent No.2 and accused No.1 was strained during 2021, when a petition under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act in MC No.45 of 2021 on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Moodabidre came to be filed by accused No.1. The private complaint came to be lodged by respondent No.2 on 27.06.2022 alleging that the shares and mutual funds standing in the name of accused No.1 was sold by her without informing him. Admittedly, shares and mutual funds were standing in the name of accused No.1 and there was no reason for her to take permission from respondent No.2 to sell the same. If the complainant is having any claim over the same, he can claim it in accordance with law.
8. With regard to removing of valuables from the locker, it is stated that locker was standing jointly in the names of accused No.1 and respondent No.2. Since the locker was in the names of accused No.1 and respondent No.2, bank officials have permitted accused No.1 to operate the locker. If at all, respondent No.2 was to stop accused No.1 from removing the -6- NC: 2025:KHC:7039 CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022 valuables from the locker, he should have instructed the banker in that regard. No such action appears to have been taken. Under such circumstances, I do not find any reason to invoke either Section 406 or Section 420 of IPC.
9. Learned senior advocate for respondent No.2 contended that in MC No.45 of 2021 pending on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Moodabidre, accused No.1 has misled the Court by suppressing the material facts. She has not informed the Court regarding selling of shares and mutual funds standing in her name nor she has informed that she has withdrawn the valuables kept in the joint locker. If at all, this fact is to be admitted, respondent No.2 could have moved the Trial Court in MC No.45 of 2021 for having misled the Court by suppressing of materials, but the same may not give rise to registration of criminal case invoking Sections 406 and 420 of IPC. Therefore, I am of the opinion that initiation of criminal proceedings is an arm-twisting tactics against accused No.1 since she has initiated action under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act. Hence, it is nothing but abuse of process of law and it is to be quashed. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the Affirmative and proceed to pass the following: -7-
NC: 2025:KHC:7039 CRL.P No. 9540 of 2022 ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners - accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.118 of 2022 (PCR No.22 of 2022) of Moodabidre Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 read with section 34 of IPC, is hereby quashed.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, IA 1 of 2024 and IA 2 of 2022 filed for stay stands disposed off.
Sd/-
(M G UMA) JUDGE *bgn/-
CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 25