Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38677
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6538 OF 2021 BETWEEN:
1. SRI. PRASAD SHETTY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY, 2. SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR SHETTY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, S/O BANTAPPA SHETTY, BOTH ARE R/AT SIDDI VINAYAKA, SOMU SHETTY COMPOUND, NEAR PADAVU HIGH SCHOOL, MANGALURU - 575 005.
…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHARADI S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VEDAVATHI A K THROUGH THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, Location: Hig h MANGALORE EAST P.S.
Court of Karnataka REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 575 001.
2. MR. SADANANDA R SHERVEGAR AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O RAMACHANDRA SHERVEGAR, R/AT DYANIVILLA HOUSE, YEYYADI, MANGALURU - 575 008.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. I.S.PRAMOD CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.102/2021 OF MANGALURU EAST POLICE STATION ALLEGING OFFENCES P/U/S 341, 323, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF J.M.F.C.-VI COURT, MANGALURU AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN THE SAID CASE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and
3 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR in Crime No.102/2021 registered by Mangalore East Police station arising out of P.C.No.9/2021 referred by the Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. The case of the prosecution is that respondent No.2 filed a complaint before the Magistrate under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., the same was referred to the Police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and in turn, the Police registered the FIR. It is alleged by the complainant that when he asked the accused to measure and demarcate the land purchased by him, which is of 83.5 cents of land, the accused persons called the complainant in order to measure the said property. when measured, instead of 83.5 cents of land, there was only 68 cents of land and rest of the land has been acquired by the accused Nos.1 to 3 unauthorizedly. When the complainant questioned about the same, the accused persons said to have assaulted, abused in filthy language and threatened with the dire consequences. Thereafter, complainant went to the Police station, filed the complaint, registered NCR, but the police have not taken any action. Hence, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 3 have filed this petition to quash the FIR which is under challenge.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the Magistrate has not followed the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivatsava and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287. The complainant while filing the PCR, the complaint was not accompanied with the affidavit as per the guidelines issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court which is not sustainable under the law. Hence, prayed for quashing the same.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 though seriously objected the petition, however, submits that the complainant has not approached the Higher Authorities under Section 154(3) of Cr.P.C. In case, if the petition came to be allowed, liberty may be given to proceed in accordance with law.
6. Having heard the arguments and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, on perusal of the complaint which reveals, the incident occurred on 3.7.2021, FIR came to be registered, issued NCR, they also made an endorsement that the dispute is of civil in nature. Subsequently, the respondent No.2 did not approach the Higher Authorities under Section 154(3) of Cr.P.C. as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Srivatsava stated supra. The complainant as per P.C.No.09/2021 filed a complaint without proper affidavit in this case. Therefore, going into the merit of the case, due to the technical issues, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Priyanka Srivatsava stated supra, the very NCR filed by the police is not sustainable under the law. The FIR and complaint filed by the complainant are liable to be quashed.
7. Accordingly the petition is allowed.
The FIR and the complaint filed by respondent No.2 are hereby quashed. However, liberty is reserved to respondent No.2 to approach the concerned authorities in accordance with law as per the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
