Criminal charges lacking substantial evidence of wrongdoing can be quashed to prevent abuse of judicial process.

ORDER :

(M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.)

These twin petitions spring from the same fount of controversy arising out of C.C.No.12622 of 2024, pending before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, wherein the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.11368 of 2024 is accused No.1 and Criminal Petition No.11384 of 2024 concerns accused No.3. The complainant in both the cases is common.

2. For the sake of convenience, facts obtaining in Criminal Petition No.11368 of 2024 are narrated.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

It is the case of the prosecution that the 2^nd respondent / complainant registers a private complaint in P.C.R.No.12196 of 2023, which is referred to investigation by the learned Magistrate under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. It then becomes a crime in Crime No.200 of 2023. The reason for registering the crime is an incident that happens on 28-02-2023. The relationship between the protagonists is that, the complainant is a resident in an apartment complex. The complainant is the owner and in possession of Flat No.G1 on the ground floor of the Embassy Palace, Nandidurga Road, Jayamahal Extension, Bangalore. Accused No.1 is a resident in Flat No.302, on the third floor of the same apartment and accused No.3 is a civil contractor. On 28-02-2023, it is the case of the complainant that she was on her way to the hospital, to take care of her mother, who had undergone knee surgery and at that time, she notices six members near the apartment in the garden area. When the complainant questioned why those people were standing in the garden area, they replied that they had come to clean the apartment and dig a rain water harvesting pit. Therefore, the contractor has brought 4 labourers and all of them were digging the pit. When the complainant questioned them, they are said to have used harsh words and sung some filthy songs. This is the crux of the complaint. The complaint then becomes a crime in Crime No.200 of 2023. The Police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet against the accused herein for using filthy language against the complainant. Filing of the charge sheet is what has driven the accused to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Heard Sri Adit Chandangoudar, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.11368 of 2024, Sri K. Abhishek, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.11384 of 2024 and in both the petitions, Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri R.Raja, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.11368/2024, Sri Adit Chandangoudar would vehemently contend that none of the ingredients of offences are found in the case at hand. It was the mandate of law that rain water harvesting has to be done in every place. Rain water harvesting was not done in which the complainant and accused No.1 are residing. Therefore, the contractor had brought four people to dig and keep the rain water harvesting process ready. It is at that time, certain altercations happen as the complainant did not want rain water harvesting be done in the apartment area. She goes and files a civil suit seeking injunction against the Association of the apartment in O.S.No.1667 of 2023. The said suit is pending. Notwithstanding filing of the suit, the criminal law is also set into motion on the same set of facts, only to wreak vengeance or counterblast to the act of the petitioner in seeking to comply with the mandate of law as notified by the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (‘BWSSB’).

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in the companion petition would toe the lines