Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH
V. SRISHANANDA
Amarappa S/o Basannagouda – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' arguments against the charges. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. court's rationale regarding the insufficiency of allegations. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. conclusion on the dismissal of the petition. (Para 14) |
ORDER :
V. SRISHANANDA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel Sri Mahantesh Patil for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel Sri Shivanand Pattanshetti for respondent No.2.
2. This petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., with the following prayer:
“WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court be please to quash the charge sheet and order of taking cognizance dated: 15-07-2021 in C.C.No.1178/2021 CRIME No.49/2020 Registered by Manvi P.S., pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC at Manvi, for the offences punishable U/Secs.420 & 409 of IPC, in the interest of justice and equity.”
3. Facts in the nutshell, which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under:
3.1 A complaint came to be lodged by Buddmma S/o. Mallesh Madiga with Manvi Police, which was registered in Crime No.49/2020 on 09.03.2020 for the offences punishable under Section s
For offenses under IPC Sections 420 and 409, allegations must clearly demonstrate fraudulent inducement and dishonesty; mere misunderstandings do not suffice for quashing proceedings.
The court established that allegations of cheating must demonstrate fraudulent inducement, which was not present, allowing for the quashing of criminal proceedings.
Specific allegations of assault and threats warrant a full trial, even in cases involving prior civil disputes and claims of forged documents.
The court established that civil disputes should not be cloaked as criminal offenses, emphasizing the need for clear evidence of criminal intent to sustain charges of cheating.
The court emphasized that civil disputes should not be converted into criminal cases, and found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the applicants, leading to the quashing of the charge-sheet.
(1) Exercise of inherent jurisdiction – Appreciation of contradictions or inconsistencies in witness statements lies within exclusive domain of trial Court and not in proceedings under Section 482 Cr....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the absence of elements such as fraudulent inducement and dishonest misappropriation can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings under....
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
