Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 6946
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K. NATARAJAN, J
SRI.C.T.PONNAPPA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRL.P 1361 of 2023
Self-defense claims must be evaluated in a full trial context, and conflicting FIRs arising from the same incident cannot be quashed without adjudication.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 341, 504, 506, 307 - Arms Act, 1959 - Quashing of FIRs - Petitioner sought to quash proceedings arising from two FIRs related to a dispute over a pathway, involving allegations of threats and firearm use - The court found that both cases stemmed from the same incident and should be tried together to determine the aggressor - The court emphasized that self-defense claims must be evaluated in a full trial context. (Paras 1-7)
(B) Self-defense - The court reiterated that self-defense claims should be substantiated through a full trial, and cannot be resolved through pre-trial motions. (Paras 6-7)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner was involved in a dispute with the complainant regarding a pathway, leading to allegations of threats and firearm discharge. The petitioner claimed self-defense, while the complainant alleged aggression.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that both FIRs arose from the same incident and should be adjudicated together to ascertain the true aggressor.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the FIRs could be quashed without a trial, given the conflicting allegations of aggression and self-defense.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that both cases must proceed to trial to establish the facts and determine culpability, rejecting the notion of pre-trial resolution.
Result: Both criminal petitions are dismissed.
ORAL ORDER
Criminal Petition No.1361/2023 is filed by the petitioner- accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.1803/2022, arising out of Crime No.32/2021 registered by the Siddapura police Station, Madikeri, Kodagu District, now pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Virajpet, for the offences punishable under Sections 504 , 506 , 307 of IPC and under Section 3, 25 & 30 of the Arms Act , 1959.
Criminal Petition No.9886/2022 is filed by the petitioner Nos.1 to 5-accused Nos.1, 2, 4 to 6 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.43/2022, arising out of Crime No.33/2021 registered by the Siddapura police Station, Madikeri, Kodagu District, now pending on the file of the Principal II Addl. Civil Judge (JD) AND J.M.F.C., Virajpet, for the offences punishable under Sections 341 , 504, 506, 427 R/w 149 of IPC .
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The case of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.1361/2023 arising out of crime No.32/2021 is that, there was dispute between the husband of the complainant and the petitioner who said to be the brother of her husband. The petitioner said to be using the land of the respondent No.2 as pathway to go to his estate. About six months back petitioner/accused has destroyed the road with JCB. In spite of asking him to repair the road, he has not done it. In this regard a complaint also filed to the respondent No.1 police station. However, on the date of incident the respondent No.2 sent his son and others for repairing the road, at that time the petitioner said to be came, picked up quarrel and abused them in filthy language @ 12.30 P.M. and threatened to kill, then he went back to home brought his gun and fired towards them, it was miss fired, hence they have been escaped from the accused and intimated to the respondent No.1 police. Accordingly, a complaint came to be filed. The police registered the FIR and filed the charge sheet which is under challenge.
4. The case of the petitioner in Crl.P.No.9886/2022, where the Ponnappa the petitioner- in Crl.P.No.1361/2023 who is accused, as the complainant in this case. The FIR has registered in Crime No.33/2021, where he has stated that the accused persons who are digging the road by obstructing the way by using the JCB, men and material, he requested to stop them but they not stopped and said to be came for attack him. Hence, as a self defence he took the gun and fired towards the air. Thereafter, he lodged the complaint. The police have registered the FIR in Crime No.33/2021, investigating the same and filed the charge sheet, which is under challenge.
5. Here in these cases the parties and fact of the case are the same. The dispute between the petitioner/accused and his brother's wife and children in respect of path way. It is also submitted by the learned counsel, previously there was an allegation against the Ponnappa, he said to be committed murder of his own brother, who is the husband of the respondent No.2 herein. And he was said to be convicted and even High Court of Karnataka has upheld the conviction, later the Hon'ble Supreme Court acquitted him. Due to the enmity a false case has been registered against him.
6. On the other hand the counsel for the respondent and learned HCGP submits the accused destroyed the road by using the JCB for digging the road long back but he has not repaired it. The respondent No.2 and family members started to repairing the road by using the mud and preparing the pipeline. On that time accused came and abused him and threatened with dire consequences. Later he went back to the home and brought the gun and fired towards the witnesses and they have been escaped from the fire and lodged the complaint.
7. On hearing the both sides and on perusal of the records which reveals, the case and counter case registered ag
