The existence of gravely injured parties in a property dispute substantiates criminal proceedings under IPC, regardless of ongoing civil disputes.

ORDER :

M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.

These petitions are preferred by different accused in different crime numbers arising out of a dispute over the same property. The petitioners in Crl.P.No.8634/2023 and Crl.P.No.4198/2024 are before this court calling in question the proceedings in CC.No.5272/2022 arising of out of the FIR in Crime No. 02/2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 174, 175, 201, 326, 447, 504 and 506 of the IPC. The petitioner in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 is before this court calling in question the proceedings in CC.No.113/2022 arising of out of the FIR in Crime No. 60/2021 registered for offences punishable under Sections 427, 326 and 506 of the IPC.

2. Heard Sri. Keerthi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.8634/2023, Smt. Radhika K., learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4198/2024, Sri. Vinay Mahadevaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State in all the three petitions and Sri. V.B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for petitioner in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 in Crl.P.No.4198/2024.

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

The petitioners and respondent No.2 in all the petitions before this Court are at loggerheads over the same property. They are also before the concerned Civil Court in O.S.Nos.347/2021 and O.S. Nos.17/2022. The issue does not relate to the civil proceedings. Different complaints are filed by the complainants/Respondent No.2 in the subject petitions alleging that the accused have assaulted and instigated such assault, on different dates. The complaints come to be registered for the varied offences including the ones punishable under Sections 324 and 326 of the IPC. The Police conduct investigation and file the charge sheets for the aforesaid complaints. Filing of the charge sheets against the petitioners herein, have driven the petitioners to this Court in the subject petitions.

4. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner in Crl.P.No.8634/2024, would vehemently contend that it is a case of a case and counter case. The petitioner has also been assaulted, but the allegation is that the petitioner has assaulted the complainants. He would seek to draw a difference between the crime registered by the complainant against the petitioner from the crime which is registered by the petitioner against the complainant. He would submit that it is not a case of blow vs. blow as it has happened on different times.

5. Learned counsel representing for the petitioner in Crl.P.No.4198/2024 would, in particular, submit that there is no allegation against the petitioner that would touch upon the ingredients of any of the offences so alleged. In that light, she would seek quashment of the proceedings.

6. Learned counsel representing the petitioner in Crl.P.No.9889/2024 states that the offences alleged against the petitioner are not made out in the said case and there is no direct or circumstantial evidence against the petitioner. Further, there is no material in the case to sustain charges under Section 324 of the IPC. In that light, he would seek quashment of the proceedings.

7. Per contra, Learned HCGP appearing for the state in all these petitions would take this Court through the wound certificate and the summary of the charge sheet in all the cases to contend that the dispute subsists and the assault has happened because of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.8634/2023 and would contend that the offences are the ones punishable under Sections 326 or 324 of IPC as the case would be, which are grave in nature and this Court should not exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.PC. to entertain the subject petitions.

8. I have given my anxious c