Back
VENKATESH NAIK T
Sugurappa @ Sugurayya Swami S/o. Kambalayya Swami Shilavantmath – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short, 'Cr.P.C') for quashing the order dated 13-10-2020 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Devadurga, in Criminal Case No.492 of 2020 (arising out of Crime No.62 of 2020 of Gabbur Police Station) for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (for short, ‘IPC').
2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant.
3. The petitioners are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 3 as per the F.I.R. and the charge-sheet. On the strength of the complaint filed by respondent No.2, the Investigating Officer conducted investigation and after completion of the investigation, he submitted charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 for the aforesaid offences. Thus, jurisdictional J.M.F.C. took cognizance of the complaint under Section 190(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C. in Criminal Case No.492 of 2020 and issued process against accused Nos.1 to 3 to face the trial for the aforesaid offenc
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C if they are found to be an abuse of due process of law.
The absence of specific abusive language in a complaint under Section 504 IPC negates the claim of intentional insult necessary for criminal intimidation.
The court emphasized the necessity for consistent evidence in summoning orders and declared the proceedings an abuse of process due to contradictions and retaliatory motives behind the complaint.
Non-cognizable offences pursued without necessary sanctions result in abuse of process.
The court established that allegations in the FIR did not constitute extortion or criminal intimidation, emphasizing the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offences.
The court established that civil disputes should not be mischaracterized as criminal offenses to avoid abuse of the judicial process.
The court quashed criminal proceedings due to lack of necessary ingredients in the complaint and unexplained delay, constituting an abuse of legal process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
