Criminal Petition No. 3068 of 2019 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3068 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ANNAIAH REDDY S.R., S/O LATE S.A. RAMASWAMY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS 2. S.A. ANAND S/O SRI. ANNAIAH REDDY S.R, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 3. SRI. S.A. PASANNA KUMAR S/O ANNAIAH REDDY S.R, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 4. SRI. VASUDEV Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka S/O SRI. ANNAIAH REDDY S.R., AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.85/2, 2ND MAIN, 5TH CROSS, MARUTHI NAGAR, MADIWALA, BENGALURU - 560 068. …PETITIONERS
Legal Reasoning
counsel for the petitioners is prima facie supported by the materials on record. Even though it is the contention of respondent No.2 that he was in occupation of portion of - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 building as tenant and the incident had taken place on the date and time referred to by him, in the Civil suit i.e., O.S.No.7060/2012, there is no reference to him to be in occupation of the premises. Even though it is contended that respondent No.2, his wife and father were assaulted by the petitioners, there are no prima facie materials for having sustained any injuries or taking treatment in any of the hospitals. 11. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the criminal compliant registered is an abuse of process of law by making allegations and by invoking the provisions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It is yet another classic example of misuse of provisions of the enactment which was enacted with the laudable object protecting the rights of real oppressive class in the society. Hence, I am of the opinion that criminal proceedings against the petitioners are liable to be quashed. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 12. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the Affirmative and proceed to pass the following:
Arguments
(BY SRI. NAIK N.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, ADUGODI POLICE STATION, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU. - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 2. SRI. MURTHY K.N., S/O KENCHAPPA, R/AT NO. 2, SY NO. 84-1-C, RAGAVENDRA ELECTRICAL, SRINIVASA TEMPLE ROAD, 2ND MAIN, MARUTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 068. (BY SRI. VENKAT SATHYANARAYAN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT)) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.95/2019 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.427, 147, 143, 506, 148, 149, 448, 323 OF IPC R/W SEC.3(1)(X) OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989 ON THE COMPLAINT OF SRI.MURTHY.K.N. WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS 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 to 4 are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in Crime No.95/2019 of Madivala police station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Sections 427, 147, 143, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 506, 148, 149, 448 and 323 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 as informant filed the first information with Madivala police alleging that he is in occupation of rented premises belonging to Sri.Chikkaramaiah Reddy. On 13.04.2019 at 6.00 a.m. when the informant was staying in the said house along with his family members, accused Nos.1 to 4 along with 30 other persons came and attacked him with deadly weapons. They assaulted the wife and father of the informant and caused injuries and abused the informant referring to his caste and criminally intimidated to take away his life and life of his family members. Thereby, they have committed the above said offences. Accordingly, he requested the police to register the case and to initiate legal action. Accordingly, the police have registered the case and referred the matter for investigation. In the meantime, the petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 4 have approached this Court seeking to - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them. Interim order of stay was granted and therefore, no further investigation was undertaken. 3. Heard Sri.Naik N.R., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Venkat Sathyanarayan, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 -State. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 remained absent and his arguments is taken as Nil. Perused the materials on record. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by the 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?" 5. My answer to the above point is in ‘Affirmative’ for the following: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 R E A S O N S 6. Respondent No.2 as complainant filed the first information with Madivala police against accused No.1 and his son alleging commission of offences as stated above. It is stated that the incident had taken place on 13.04.2019 at 6.00 a.m. and the first information came to be filed on the same day at 18.30 hours. The FIR was forwarded to the learned Magistrate on 15.04.2019 at 2.00 p.m. There is inordinate delay in forwarding the FIR to the learned Magistrate. Respondent No.2 even though served, remained absent. He is not contesting the petition. 7. There is allegation that petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 4 along with 30 other persons have attacked and assaulted the informant, his wife and father. They criminally intimidated to cause their death and also abused the informant by referring to his caste with an intention to defame. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that owner of the property i.e., Sri.Chikkaramaiah Reddy referred to in the first information had filed O.S.No.7060/2012 against petitioner No.1 for declaration of his right over the property. There is no reference to the present respondent No.2 in the said suit being in occupation of any portion of the building as a tenant. The counter claim filed by the petitioner No.1 seeking permanent injunction restraining the said Sri. Chikkaramaiah Reddy from inducting any third party as tenant came to be decreed. It is stated that after decreeing the counter claim filed by petitioner No.1, respondent No.2 tried to take forcible possession of a portion of the property at the instance of Sri.Chikkaramaiah Reddy and filed the present complaint. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced the copy of similar complaint filed by respondent No.2 against one Sri.Shankar Reddy and others making similar allegations. The said complaint produced as per - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3798 CRL.P No. 3068 of 2019 Document No.3 is dated 22.06.2019 with Madivala police. A non-cognizable offence was registered by Madivala police. Document No.5 produced by the petitioners is the statement of respondent No.2 given to Madivala police on 22.06.2019 itself, according to which, he was instructed by Sri.Shankar Reddy that Nanjappa is due to pay certain amount to Sri.Shankar Reddy and asked respondent No.2 to go near the house of Nanjappa and demand for payment of the amount. Pursuant to the same, he went to the house of Nanjappa and started demanding the amount and later filed the complaint. 10. Placing reliance on these documents, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that respondent No.2 is in the habit of filing similar complaints only to extract money taking advantage of the fact that he belongs to Schedule Caste. The contention taken by the learned
Decision
ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The FIR registered in Crime No.95/2019 of *Madivala Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Sections 427, 147, 143, 506, 148, 149, 448 and 323 of IPC, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE MH/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16 CT: BHK *Corrected vide Court Order Dated 17/02/2025.