Writ Petition No. 17277 of 2023 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:2240 WP No. 17277 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 17277 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: BABU @ PS AYUB @ BOMMANAHALLIL BABU S/O SYED BASHA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS BUILDING NO 1, 4TH FLOOR, INDIAN EXPRESS BUILDING, BALEKUNDRI ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 052 ALSO AT R/AT T-3, MARIAMMA APARTMENTS, FRAZER TOWN, BANGALORE 560005 (BY SRI. MOHAMMED TAHIR.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY AMRUTHALLY PS REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OFFICE AT HIGH COURT COMPLEX, OPP TO VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE – 560 001. ...PETITIONER Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 2. LUCKY BORANA S/O NATHARAM, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NANDAGOKUL COMPLEX, 16TH A CROSS, BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR, KEMPAPURA, BANGALORE 560 024 ...RESPONDENTS
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP FOR R1) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W UNDER SECTION 482 OF CRPC., PRAYING TO-QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DTD 28.02.2023 PRESENT AT ANNEXURE-C WHICH IS REGISTERED AS C.C.NO.12065/2023 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.192/2022 U/S 380, 411 AND 109 OF IPC FILED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE AND THE SAME IS PENDING IN THE FILES OF - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:2240 WP No. 17277 of 2023 HONBLE VII ACMM AT BANGALORE, WHEREIN THE PETITIONER IS ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.3. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following relief: "Quash the Charge sheet dated 28.02.2023 present at Annexure-C, which is registered as CC No.12065/2023 arising out Crime No.192/2022 U/s.380,411 and 109 of IPC filed by the Respondent-Police and the same is pending on the file of VII ACMM, Bangalore, wherein the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.3 in the interest of justice and equity". 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for 1st respondent – State and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.3 in the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.12065/2023, arising out of Crime No.192/2022 dated 10.08.2022, which was registered against unknown persons. After investigation, the police have filed the charge sheet against the petitioner and other accused persons, in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2240 WP No. 17277 of 2023 which, one Venkatesh is arraigned as accused No.1 and the petitioner is shown to be the Director of M/s.Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore. In this context, it is relevant to state that the petitioner had resigned from the status / position of a Director from the aforesaid M/s. Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd., on 01.01.2016 itself as can be seen from Form No.DIR-11 issued by the Registrar of Companies. The said fact has been recognised and confirmed by this Court in W.P.No.19063/2021 dated 09.06.2022 filed by the petitioner, in which, this Court quashed the proceedings impugned therein as against the petitioner herein on the ground that he had resigned from the company on 01.01.2016 itself, much prior to the alleged commission of the offence and that no proceedings can be initiated or prosecuted against the resigned Director. In the aforesaid order of this Court in the aforesaid writ petition filed by the petitioner, it was held as under:- “ In this petition, the first information report was lodged alleging that the gold jewelleries belonging to the complainant were stolen by the accused and the said accused sold the same to the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd in various branches. 2. The Police registered the FIR in Crime No.138/2020 and after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner alleging that he is the Director of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2240 WP No. 17277 of 2023 the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd and as such has committed an offence punishable under Sections 380 and 342 read with Section 34 of IPC. Taking exception to the same this petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company on 01.01.2016 which is evident from Form No.DIR-11 issued by the Registrar of Companies. Hence he submits that the alleged incident has taken place after the petitioner ceased to be Director of the said company and as such the FIR registered against the petitioner is impermissible. 4. Learned HCGP submits that the petitioner being the Director of the company has received stolen property from the accused and as such has committed the offence alleged against him and at this stage, the FIR registered against the petitioner and the charge sheet submitted against the petitioner does not warrant any interference and sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. To substantiate the claim that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd. to which the stolen property was sold, Form No.DIR-11 issued by the Registrar of Companies is produced. The said document indicates that the petitioner/accused ceased to be the Director of the company with effect from 01.01.2016. The alleged incident has taken place after the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company in question which is alleged to have received the stolen property. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:2240 WP No. 17277 of 2023 7. The resignation of the petitioner as Director of the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd. is evident from Form No.DIR-11. The same has remained uncontroverted and not disputed by the respondents. In the absence of any dispute to the said document, it is implied that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company in question as on the date of the alleged incident. Hence, in the absence of any corroborative material that the petitioner as director of the company in question has received the stolen property, the registration of FIR and also the filing of charge sheet is without any substance. 8. Accordingly, I pass the following: i) ii)
Decision
ORDER The Writ petition is allowed. The impugned FIR in Crime No.138/2020 is quashed. iii) Liberty is reserved with the respondent State to proceed against the company which is alleged to have received the stolen property in accordance with law, if so advised.” 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the undisputed fact that identical proceedings against the petitioner - accused No.3 have already been quashed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition and in the light of the petitioner having resigned from the post of a Director as long back as on 01.01.2016, continuation of the proceedings insofar as the petitioner is - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:2240 WP No. 17277 of 2023 concerned, would tantamount to an abuse of the process of law warranting interference by this Court. 5. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.12065/2023 arising out of Crime No.192/2022 registered by the 1st respondent – police, pending on the file of VII ACMM, Bangalore, are hereby quashed. SD/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE RB/SRL