This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the complaint dated 01.04.2015 lodged by the second respondent at Annexure –A in Cr. No.61/2015 pending on the file of the Learned IV ACMM, Bangalore and quash the FIR dated 06.05.2015 at Annexure –B in Cr. No. 61/2015.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and also learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-1 State and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-2/complainant.

3. The case of the complainant as per the complaint dated 01.04.2015 that he is the GPA holder for L. Srinivas owner of the mortgaged property. Srinivas is suffering from immobility due to the paralysis of both the sides in 2002 and 2003. In order to take care of his health and to fight the cases filed by Sharathchandra and others from 2007, Srinivas took loan of around Rs.7.25 lakhs from Ashok Jain and executed two mortgages in favour of him. Along with the one above in which Srinivas handed over the possession, another equitable mortgage was executed by Srinivas as security for the same. As per the terms of the registered mortgage his land should be returned to him in vacant position and should not change its structure in any way. Due to the circumstances beyond petitioner’s control, a mafia trespassed into the property on 09.02.2011.

4. Subsequently, Ashok Jain told the complainant that he has got a Temporary Injunction (TI) against them and will take possession immediately. Unfortunately, he came to the complainant’s house several times in 2012 and asked him to sell the property to the same tress-passers and convert the mortgage money as advance and execute an agreement with the petitioner and as the complainant refused, petitioner handed over the possession of complainant’s mortgaged property to the same tress-passers after taking money from them. Therefore, on that basis the FIR came to be registered as against the petitioner herein.

5. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submitted that looking to the complaint averments there are allegations that the petitioner herein committed the alleged offences. Therefore, it is necessary that investigation is to be conducted and final report is to be filed. Learned counsel submitted that it is not a case for quashing of FIR. In support of his contention learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that looking to the contents of the complaint itself prima facie admittedly mortgage is between the complainant and the petitioner herein. Learned senior counsel also submitted that even the complaint averments go to show that tress-pass by the mafia is concerned, the petitioner himself filed proceedings and obtained the TI against those persons. Hence, it is his contention that when he is under possession of the mortgage transaction, the petitioner tress-passed into the land of the complainant, no offences could be made out from the FIR. This case is frivolous and with malafide intention case has been filed. Hence, he submitted to allow the petition and quash the proceedings. In support to his contention learned senior counsel relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (2013) 11 SCC 673, and drew the attention of the Court to its relevant paragraph Nos. 10, 11 and 13 which reads as under:

“10. In the complaint, it is the case of Respondent 2 that this suit has been filed on the basis of fabricated documents. It is categorically stated on affidavit by the appellant that the said suit is still pending. If the said suit is still pending, then the grievance made by Respondent 2 that the documents on which reliance is placed by the appellant are not genuine and are forged and fabricated, will be considered by the civil court.

11. It is also significant to note that prior to the filing of this complaint, Respondent 2 tried to lodge and FIR ag