Back
2002 Supreme(Kar) 533
Karnataka High Court
Judges : N.S.Veerabhadraiah
J.RASARANJAN - Appellant
Versus
STATE BY ULSOORGATE POLICE - Respondent
Criminal Petition 1975 Of 2002
Decided On : 08/26/2002
Advocates Appeared :
ANANT MANDGI, M.N.Nehru, SHASHIDHAR S.KARAMADI, UJWALA A.MANDGI
The court emphasized that the criminal proceedings should not be quashed at a preliminary stage, but in this case, the complaint was deemed an abuse of process of the court.
Headnote:
Abuse of Process - Criminal Proceedings - Sections 468, 471, 420, 120b IPC - The court quashed the FIR and the complaint registered by the Police, Ulsoorgate, for being frivolous, vexatious, and false. The complainant's act of filing a false complaint after 14 years, suppressing the execution of the agreement of sale, and managing to get the accused persons arrested was deemed an abuse of process of the court.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant filed a complaint against the petitioners for offenses under Sections 468, 471, 420, and 120b of the IPC, alleging fraudulent acts related to property ownership and fabricated documents. The accused were arrested and produced before the magistrate, challenging the registration of the FIR.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the complaint to be vexatious, frivolous, and false, and quashed the FIR and the complaint. It also levied a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the complainant for managing to get the accused persons arrested by filing a false complaint.
Issues: Whether the complaint was frivolous, vexatious, and false, and whether the registration of the case amounted to an abuse of process of law.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the complaint was an abuse of process of the court, as the complainant filed a false complaint after 14 years, suppressed the execution of the agreement of sale, and managed to get the accused persons arrested.
Final Decision: The criminal petition was allowed, and the court quashed the registration of the complaint and the FIR. A cost of Rs. 10,000 was levied on the complainant for managing to get the accused persons arrested by filing a false and vexatious complaint.
( 1 ) THE petition is under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C. by the petitioners for quashing of the FIR registered in Crime No. 248 of 2002, on the file of the VI Additional Chief Metropolitan magistrate, Bangalore City, for the offence under Sections 468, 471 and 420 read with Section 120b of the IPC.
( 2 ) THE brief facts are as follows.
The respondent 2-M. Narayan Das filed a complaint against the petitioners-J. Rasaranjan, Smt. J. Mahishree and Smt. Niranjini Srinivasan alleging that he is the owner of the land in Survey No. 66 of Sarakki Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South taluk, situated in Ward No. 57 of Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, totally measuring about 25,188 sq. ft. He learnt that some third parties are trying to get the khatha transferred in their names in the records of Mahanagara Palika. On enquiry, he learnt that his relatives by name J. Rasaranjan and Smt. J. Mahishree who have no manner of right, title and interest over the property filed application for transfer of khatha in their name. Immediately, he submitted his objections to the assistant Revenue Officer, by letters dated 25-7-2001 and 28-7-2001 with a request not to change khatha in their name. He also learnt that J. Rasaranjan and Smt. J. Mahishree have produced a fabricated partition deed dated 4-5-2001 in respect of Survey No. 66 of Sarakki village for getting the khatha changed in their name. The very same persons have filed O. S. No. 6083 of 2000 for partition in respect of Survey No. 66 and is pending before the City Civil court. The accused have resorted to a fraudulent act to knock off the valuable property belonging to him. It further came to light that they fabricated two sale deeds in favour of J. Rasaranjan and Smt. J. Mahishree and tried to project it as if that he had executed the sale deeds through his G. P. A. holder Smt. Niranjini Srinivasan. The said sale deeds dated 9-10-2001 are wholly fabricated and concocted in order to cause wrongful gain for themselves. Immediately, he filed O. S. No. 11 of 2002 to restrain the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike from changing the khatha of the property in Survey No. 66 in favour of J. Rasaranjan and Smt. J. Mahishree. In the said suit, the petitioners have contended that they have become the owners of the property by virtue of the said two registered sale deeds dated 9-10-2001. The complainant has not executed any documents in favour of any person. The accused have concocted, fabricated and forged his signature and brought into existence the documents like:
(a) G. P. A. dated 21-10-1989 executed in favour of Smt. Niranjini Srinivasan; (b) An absolute sale-cum-receipt-cum-possession certificate dated 21-10-1989; (c) An affidavit bearing the date 21-10-1989 purported to have been sworn to by him, by forging the signature and have manipulated the documents and made interpolations and got up the agreement of sale bearing the date 18-2-1988, wherein there are several other interpolations and a sketch has also been fabricated and fraudulently annexed. The stamp paper used on the agreement does not appear to be genuine and the dates on which they have been issued seem to be tampered. They have also made it appear as if they had purchased the stamp paper, which is totally false. On the basis of the said complaint, the Police Inspector of ulsoorgate Police Station registered a case in Crime No. 248 of 2002 for the offence under sections 468, 471, 420 and 120b of the IPC, forwarded the FIR to the Court of VI Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore City. The accused persons were arrested and produced before the learned Magistrate on 31-5-2002 and released on bail. It is insofar as registering of fir is concerned, is questioned in the present petition.
( 3 ) THE learned Counsel Sri Anant Mandgi contended that the complainant Narayan Das and Smt. J. Nirmala are the brother and sister. The petitioner-Rasaranjan is the son of Smt. J. Nirmala whereas, Smt. J. Mahishree was th
