Karnataka High Court
Smt. B N Asha vs Sri. Murugesh on 28 January, 2021
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
WRIT PETITION NO. 10666 OF 2019 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1) SMT.B.N.ASHA
D/O. LATE P. NARASIMHA MURTHY
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT NO.252, 1ST BLOCK
PEENYA, BENGALURU - 560 058.
2) C.M. KRISHNA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
S/O. NARAYANA REDDY
OFFICE ADDRESS NO.108
WADYER COMPLEX
BETWEEN 7TH AND 8TH CROSS
(DELETED AS PER ORDER DATED 21.03.2019)
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SAMPATH.A FOR SRI. PUNEETH.K, ADVOCATES)
AND:
SRI MURUGESH
S/O. SRI MAHANTESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT NO.252 (PORTION)
GROUND FLOOR, 1ST BLOCK
3RD CROSS, 1ST STAGE
PEENYA, BENGALURU - 560 058
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.K. VASANTH, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORDS IN O.S.NO.3928/2009 FROM THE FILE OF THE
COURT OF THE XII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, BENGALURU, APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 340(1) OF
2
CR.P.C., AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.02.2019 WHICH
IS ENCLSOED AS ANNEXURE-F.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner being the plaintiff in an ejectment suit in O.S.No.3928/2009 is knocking at the doors of the Writ Court for assailing the order dated 12.02.2019, a copy whereof is at Annexure-F, whereby the learned Judge of the Court below has directed lodging of a police complaint against her and her counsel Sri C.M.Krishna Reddy for the offences punishable under Sections 192, 196, 198, 463, 464, 466 and 471 of IPC in Ex.No.171/2011.
2. Respondent-defendant No.1 is represented by Sri. K.K.Vasanth on request and he vehemently opposes the writ petition contending that the order impugned is made for maintaining purity & sanctity of the judicial proceedings and therefore, the writ Court should not ordinarily grant indulgence.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to 3 grant indulgence in the matter inasmuch as, the manipulation of the record which the learned Judge of the Court below mentions in the impugned order is not there and that no such manipulation is forthcoming from the documents which the petitioner has produced here along with the memo on the instruction of this Court.
4. There is a lot of force in the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that she has been prosecuting several cases and by sheer inadvertence, a copy of document which is not a part of another document is produced unilaterally giving a wrong impression that it is a part thereof; such things do happen by inadvertence where a person fights too many legal battles and no action can be taken against the party or his counsel, only on that ground, as rightly contended by the counsel for the petitioners.
5. It has been a settled principle of law vide PEPSI FOODS LTD Vs. SPECIAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRAGE, 1998 SCC (CRI) 1400 that criminal law cannot be set in motion by ordinary course since it is a serious matter and this principle has not been duly adverted to by the learned Judge of the 4 court below; he appears to have been swayed away by the zeal to protect the sanctity of judicial records, and protected it ought to be is beside the point.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; impugned order is set at naught; however, it is open to the respondent to propose an issue as to the daughterhood of the petitioner qua late Mr. Narasimha Murthy and that both the parties shall be given full opportunity to lead evidence in respect of the same.
All contentions of the parties are kept open for being urged in the Court below on the civil side.
Sri.K.K.Vasanth, learned counsel to file a Memo of Appearance within two weeks.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE DS/AS