The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of establishing the essential ingredients of the offences under Sections 384, 420, and 500 of IPC, particularly emphasizing the requirement of fraudulent or dishonest intention in the offence of cheating.

Rathnakala, J.

1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for parties.

2. The petitioners being the daughter and father are prosecuted by the respondent on a private complaint filed in respect of the offence under Sections 384, 420 and 500 of IPC.

3. The facts not in dispute between the parties is, the first petitioner is the widow of one Shivananda/brother of the respondent, who expired on 25.11.1999. The family of the respondent runs various businesses and trades. On the death of Shivananda, there was disturbance in the family atmosphere. The respondent filed a private complaint alleging that the properties, which were to be allotted to deceased Shivananda, are already given to the first petitioner/first accused. Still she is demanding for more money. Even after receiving Rs. 69,000/- on 3.6.2000, she had filed a complaint to the local Police. However on subsequent dates, agreements were entered into between the parties. Compromise Decree was passed in the civil suit in O.S. No. 85/2000, in view of the compromise entered into between the parties. Still she filed a complaint before the Chief Minister and she again filed a complaint before the CCB, Mysore and also before the Governor of Karnataka. She is filing complaints at the abetment of her father/second petitioner herein to extract money. The CCB, Mysore, are exerting pressure on the family members to settle illegal claim of the first petitioner. They ill-treated the complainant and his brother at her instance.

4. The learned Magistrate on presentation of the application, after recording the sworn statement of the complainant ordered to register the criminal case under Sections 384, 420and 500 of IPC.

5. Sri M.R. Rajagopal, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, it is already eight years since the complaint was filed before the Court. The interim stay order passed in this case is operating. Since the complainant and other family members did not comply the terms of the settlement arrived inter se and did not part with the properties in accordance with the decree of the Civil Court, first petitioner was compelled to file the complaint before various authorities. She being a young widow having responsibility of raising two minor kids, had no other option except to file the complaint. There was no mala fide on her part to defame the in-laws/complainant. None of the offences for which the criminal case is registered is attracted from the complaint allegation. Hence, the entire proceedings is liable to be quashed.

6. Sri G.S. Prasanna Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that, instead of taking recourse under the due process of law, the first petitioner has coerced the complainant and other family members before various authorities thereby maligning complainant's and his family members' reputation before the society. The learned Magistrate having been satisfied with the sufficiency of the material to proceed against the accused has ordered summons and the contentions raised in this petition may be availed by her as defence during the trial and this is not a fit case to exercise the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

7. The penal provisions vexed in the present petition are under Sections 384, 420 and 500 of IPC. Section 384 of IPC is the penal provision for the commission of offence of "extortion" as defined under Section 383 of IPC, which reads thus:

"383. Extortion.--Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits "extortion".

Section 420 of IPC reads thus:

"420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.--Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part o