Karnataka High Court
Sri Umedha Reddy vs State Of Karnataka on 1 April, 2022
Author: M. Nagaprasanna
Bench: M. Nagaprasanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2867/2022
BETWEEN
1. SRI. UMEDHA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
S/O LATE K.G. YELLAPPA REDDY
R/AT NO.440,
DODDA THOGURU GATE
ELECTRONIC CITY POST
BENGALURU - 560 100
2. SRI. ASHOKA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O LATE GURUVA REDDY
R/AT NO.59, 3RD MAIN
3RD CROSS,
BAKERS COLONY
RING ROAD, BHOGADI
MYSORE - 570 026
... PETITIONERS
[BY SRI. LAXMIKANTHA K.B, ADV.]
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
CENTRAL CRIME BRANCH
BENGALURU
2
2. SMT. KATHYAYINI
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
W/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA SHETTY
NO.16, 'PRESTINE MAGMAN SRINIVAGILU'
28TH CROSS, EJIPURAM MAIN ROAD,
INNER RING ROAD,
KORAMANGALA
BENGALURU - 560 034
... RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI. B.J.ROHITH, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. AJAY KADKOL, ADV. FOR R2]
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 14.03.2022 PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU, IN
C.C.NO. 892/2021 ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THEM
U/S 452 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND
FURTHER, BE PLEASED TO DIRECT THE TRIAL
MAGISTRATE TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION FILED BY
THE PETITIONERS UNDER SECTION 452 OF THE CODE OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FORTHWITH.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an order dated 14.03.2022, passed in C.C.No.892/2021, keeping an application in abeyance to await further orders.
3
2. Heard Sri. Laxmikantha K.B., learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri.B.J.Rohith, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and Sri. Ajay Kadkol, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The petitioners were accused Nos.4 and 5 in C.C.No.892/2021. The offences against the petitioners were the ones punishable under Sections 415, 420 and 120B read with Section 34 of IPC.
4. The petitioners calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.892/2021 had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.7743/2021. This Court by its order dated 09.02.2022, allowed the petition by the following order:
"3. During the pendency of this petition, both the parties, the petitioners and respondent No.3, have filed joint compromise application under section 320 read with 482 of Cr.P.C seeking permission of this Court for 4 compounding the offence as they have settled the dispute by way of Memorandum of Understanding dated 24.08.2021. The copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is produced before this Court.
4. Since the alleged offences is compoundable one with the permission of the court, also the petitioner and respondent No.3 are stated to be brothers and sister, such being the case the joint affidavit and application filed by the petitioners and responding No.3 is hereby accepted. The parties are permitted to compound the offence.
The petition is allowed, consequently, the criminal proceedings against accused persons in C.C.No.892/2021 pending on the file of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under section 120(B), 415, 420 read with 34 of IPC, is hereby quashed."5
5. All the criminal proceedings against the petitioners stood quashed. The quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners have become final.
6. Pursuant to the quashment of the proceedings in favour of the petitioners, the petitioners preferred an application under Section 452 of Cr.P.C., for de-freezment of the account of the petitioners individually held by them. The learned Magistrate by an order dated 17.03.2022, declines to grant the relief that is sought in the application and directs the application to be kept in abeyance. The order reads as follows:
"Case taken on board. Sri KBL filed memo on behalf of A4 and 5 along with copy of order of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in Crl.Prt.No.7743/2021 and prays to pass necessary orders on application u/sec.452 CRPC filed by A4 and 5. However, as already stated above the further proceedings of the case are stayed by 6 Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in WP No.23106/2021 and as such no orders can be passed on said application till stay is vacated. Hence memo filed by Sri KBL rejected. Await further orders by 31.05.2022."
It is this order that is called in question in this petition.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that once the allegations against the petitioners have been obliterated by an order of this Court, the learned Magistrate could not have passed the order keeping it in abeyance on the ground that the other accused have preferred W.P.No.23106/2021.
8. On the other hand, the learned counsel representing the second respondent, Sri.Ajay Kadkol would submit that the accounts are individually held and the petitioners before this Court are other accused, albeit the proceedings arise from C.C.No.892/2021 itself 7 and would submit that it is for this Court to pass an appropriate orders.
9. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.
10. The afore-narrated facts of the petitioners approaching this Court and the obliteration of the proceedings in their favour is not in dispute. The other accused have approached this Court in W.P.No.23106/2021. Though the other accused have preferred the aforesaid writ petition and an interim order is operating in their favour, that would not come in the way of the decision to be taken under Section 452 of Cr.P.C. Since all the allegations either of Sections 420, 415 and 120B of IPC against the petitioners have stood quashed, if they stand quashed against the petitioners, all consequences of quashment of the proceedings should enure to the benefit of the 8 petitioners. The accounts according to the application are individually held by the petitioners. Therefore, when there is no proceeding pending against the petitioners, the learned Magistrate fell in error by keeping an application in abeyance on the score that the writ petition filed by the other accused is pending consideration at the hands of this Court.
11. Therefore, the petition on this score deserves to succeed.
12. The order dated 14.03.2022 passed by the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.892/2021 stands quashed.
Learned Magistrate is directed to consider the application bearing in mind the observations in the course of this order and pass an appropriate orders on the said application filed under Section 452 of Cr.P.C., 9 within 15 days, from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
With the aforesaid observations, the criminal petition stands disposed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KG