Judicial discharge of an accused precludes subsequent supplementary charges based on the same incident to prevent abuse of process and ensure justice.

ORDER :

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers:

"A. Quash the FIR and Complaint in Crime No.50/2020 registered by the Respondent No.1 Hebbagodi Police Station for offences punishable under Section 418 , 419, 465, 468, 471, 420, 506 R/w 34 of IPC which is now pending before the Hon'ble IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in C.C.No.185/2023, (i.e. Annexure-A & A1) in so far as the Petitioner above-named is concerned;

B. Quash the entire Charge-sheet in Crime No.50/2020 registered by the Respondent No.1 Hebbagodi Police Station for offences punishable under Section 418 , 419, 465, 468, 471, 420, 506 R/w 34 of IPC which is now pending before the Hon'ble IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in C.C.No.185/2023, (i.e. Annexure-B) in so far as the Petitioner above-named is concerned;

C. Set aside the Cognizance order dated 07.02.2023 in C.C.No.185/2023 (Crime No.50/2020) for offences punishable under Section 418 , 419, 465, 468, 471, 420, 506 R/w 34 of IPC which is now pending before the Hon'ble IV Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in C.C.No.185/2023, (i.e. Annexure-C) in so far as the Petitioner above- named is concerned;

D. Pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the ends of justice."

2. Heard Shri Siddharth Suman, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Shri B.N. Jagadish, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1; Smt. Jyothi S.K., learned counsel for Shri G.S. Prasanna Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that qua accused No.1, this Court in Crl.P.No.5073/2023 disposed on 05.07.2024 had quashed the proceedings by observing as follows:

"The petitioner is accused No.1. The petitioner, intending to purchase immovable property for the purpose of investment, enters into a deed of sale with one Mrs. Dorothy Roberts, the mother of the complainant, through her power of attorney holder in respect of property bearing Sy.No.60/5 situate in Hebbagodi Village, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Anekal. It is the averment in the petition that Mrs. Dorothy Roberts herself personally executed a confirmation deed of the aforesaid sale deed in favour of the petitioner. On 05-12-2019, after the sale of the property, the complainant sought to break open the lock of the property and therefore, the petitioner files a suit before the jurisdictional civil Court in O.S.No.536 of 2019. A temporary injunction was granted against the mother of the complainant not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioner.

3. On 10-02-2020, immediately after grant of temporary injunction as aforesaid, a complaint comes to be registered by the 2^nd respondent alleging that the sale deed was executed not by the mother of the complainant but by an imposter. Based upon the said complaint, a crime comes to be registered against the petitioner arraigning him as accused No.1 and three others in Crime No.50 of 2020. Police, after investigation, file a charge sheet in C.C.No.185 of 2023 against three accused persons. On filing of the charge sheet, the petitioner takes recourse to two proceedings, one the subject criminal petition having been filed on 29-05- 2023. When no interim order was passed during the pendency of the criminal petition, the petitioner takes other recourse of filing an application seeking discharge from the array of accused before the learned Magistrate under Section 239 of the CrPC. The application was heard and order was