Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
Vinod, S/o Late J Balaraj – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J.
1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
Quashing the order dated 19.09.2015 passed by the LVII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit (CCH-58), Bangalore in Criminal Revision Petition No.25021/2015 and confirming the order of the trail court dated 29.11.2024 passed in PCR No.95/2010 in Crime No.12/2011 passed by the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore to transferred XLIII Add. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore and quash the complaint in PCR No.95/2010 in Crime No.12/2011 by allowing the above petition in the interest of justice.
2. Respondent No.2-Major Thomas Xavier had filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 against one Sri.J. Balaraj, son of late R. Joseph and B. Vinod Kumar, son of Sri Balaraj who is the Petitioner herein, as also against Smt.Komala, wife of Mr. Ramesh who is respondent No.3 herein, alleging offences under Section 420 , 464, 467, 470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code on 18.06.2010.
3. The complainant alleged that he is the son of late V.T.Xavier, who had purchased site Nos.53, 54, 55, 56, 57 and 58 under registered sale d
Execution of sale deeds does not amount to forgery without clear intent; civil disputes should not be framed as criminal complaints.
Execution of sale deeds exceeding a co-sharer’s share does not constitute forgery or cheating, reaffirming that civil disputes should not be criminalized without clear offences being present.
The execution of sale deeds by co-sharers exceeding their portion does not constitute forgery or criminal liability, reaffirming that such disputes are civil in nature.
It is well settled that in order to constitute an offence of cheating, it must be shown that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the representation or promise and ....
The court emphasized the distinction between civil disputes and criminal offences, quashing the FIR due to lack of criminal intent in the allegations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of alleged forgery, the court must consider the nature of the dispute, the absence of financial loss or loss of property, and the set....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court must consider the existence of grounds for charges against the accused before framing charges, and the lack of prima facie evidence ....
The validity of documents, probative value, and admissibility of documents cannot be examined at the stage of framing charges and can be addressed during trial. The defense taken by the accused canno....
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
