Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 44063
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7328 OF 2022 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NOS. 7404/2022, 7559/2022 AND 7625/2022 IN CRL.P NO.7328/2022 BETWEEN:
1 . ANTHONAPPA S/O CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT BASAVAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 068.
2 . ELIZABETH RANI W/O PRABHU KUMAR PJ, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT 4615/3, MUTTA ROAD, BEGUR, ANEKAL BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 092.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HULIMAVU LAYOUT P S, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . MRS. SUNITHA RAJASHEKAR W/O MR. RAJASHEKAR K V, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT NO.618, VIJAYA BANK LAYOUT, 8B MAIN ROAD, 2ND CROSS BANGALORE - 560 076.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESH, ADDITIONAL SPP ALONG WITH;
SMT. ANITHA GIRISH N., HCGP FOR R1/STATE; SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VACHAN H U., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.144/2022 FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.466, 34, 120-B, 467, 471, 474, 426, 463 OF IPC REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE THAT IS HULIMAVU POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE V ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT AT BENGALURU.
IN CRL.P NO.7404/2022 BETWEEN:
1 . ANTHONAPPA S/O CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT BASAVAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 068.
2 . ELIZABETH RANI W/O PRABHU KUMAR PJ, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT 4615/3, MUTTA ROAD, BEGUR, ANEKAL BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 092.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HULIMAVU LAYOUT P S, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . MR. SUDHEER BABU ATTE S/O MR. BALANNA ATTE, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT NO.701, ANANDA VALMIARK DODDA KAMMANHALLI MAIN ROAD OFF BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 076.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESH, ADDITIONAL SPP ALONG WITH;
SMT. ANITHA GIRISH N., HCGP FOR R1/STATE; SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VACHAN H U., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.144/2022 ARISE OUT OF PCR.NO.8474/2022 FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.466, 34, 120-B, 467, 471, 474, 426, 463 OF IPC REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE i.e., HULIMAVU POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ACMM, BENGALURU. IN CRL.P NO.7559/2022 BETWEEN:
1 . ANTHONAPPA S/O CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT BASAVAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 068.
2 . ELIZABETH RANI W/O PRABHU KUMAR PJ, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT 4615/3, MUTTA ROAD, BEGUR, ANEKAL BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 092.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HULIMAVU LAYOUT P S, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . MRS. SOWMYA SRIDHARAN AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO. G1, GJ NEST 5, 23, LASHMANAPPA NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 094.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESH, ADDITIONAL SPP ALONG WITH;
SMT. ANITHA GIRISH N., HCGP FOR R1/STATE;
SRI. DHANANJAY JOSHI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. KAVITHA DAMODARAN, ADVOCATE AND SRI. VACHAN H U., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.143/2022 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.466, 34, 120-B, 467, 471, 474, 426, 463 OF IPC REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE i.e., HULIMAVU P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V A.C.M.M., COURT AT BENGALURU.
IN CRL.P NO.7625/2022 BETWEEN:
1 . ANTHONAPPA S/O CHINNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT BASAVAPURA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 068.
2 . ELIZABETH RANI W/O PRABHU KUMAR PJ, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT 4615/3, MUTTA ROAD, BEGUR, ANEKAL BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 092.
...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. AFROZ PASHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HULIMAVU LAYOUT P S, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . MRS. VIJAYA VARDHINI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, PRESENTLY R/AT NO. 12, DEVINA FRAGRANCE GREEN GLEN LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 076.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESH, ADDITIONAL SPP ALONG WITH;
SMT. ANITHA GIRISH N., HCGP FOR R1/STATE;
SRI. VACHAN H U., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.141/2022 FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S.466, 34, 120-B, 467, 471, 474, 426, 463 OF IPC REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE THAT IS HULIMAVU POLICE STATION PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT AT BENGALURU.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 28.02.2024 THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Criminal Petition No.7328/2022, Criminal Petition No.7404/2022, Criminal Petition No.7559/2022 and Criminal Petition No.7625/2022 are filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIRs in Crime Nos.144/2022, 142/2022, 143/2022 and 141/2022 respectively, registered by Hulimavu Police Station, Electronic Sub Division, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Sections 466, 120B, 467, 471, 474, 426, 463 read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 in all four cases.
3. The case of the prosecution in all these four cases are that respondent No.2 in all the cases have filed private complaint before the Magistrate and got it referred to the Police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and in turn, the FIR was registered by the Police which is under challenge. It is alleged by the complainant that accused No.1 was the owner of land in Sy.Nos.85/1 and 90/2 of Kammanahalli Village, Belur Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, Bengaluru measuring 15 guntas and 2 acres 32 guntas where the accused No.1 got converted the land for non agricultural purpose as on 26.03.1993 and he has executed registered GPA in favour of one Subboji Rao on 9.8.1995 and the said Subboji Rao executed the sale deed in favour of Balakrishna Naidu vide sale deed dated 24.03.2004. Subsequently, the said Balakrishna Naidu formed the residential layout and sold to the complainants under the sale deed stated in the complaint. Subsequently, the Khata was changed in the name of the complainant, they are paying taxes and they are in possession of the sites. The site owners also formed an Association and got it registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960 in the name of "Balaji Garden Pragati Owners Welfare Association". On 17.04.2021, they came to know that some persons had demolished the sewage drains formed in the layout and had levelled a portion of the land, hence, the complaint has been filed to the police, the police have issued NCR stating that it is a civil dispute, therefore, the complainants have filed private complaint to the Court and in turn, it was referred to the Police and FIR has been registered which is under challenge.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has contended mainly on the ground that for one offence four FIRs were registered by filing four private complaints by the site owners for one cause of action and further contended that 17 civil cases were filed which is pending. The petitioners never executed any GPA in favour of Subboji Rao. Therefore, question of purchasing the site by the respondents does not arise. Accused No.1 was the owner of the land, he has gifted the land to accused No.2 who is the daughter and in turn, accused No.2 sold the property to accused No.3 and accused No.3 borrowed loan from accused No.4. The matter is civil in nature. There is no layout formed by the Balakrishna Naidu. There is no sanction order. The sale consideration was given to the third party but not to the land owners. Therefore, prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has seriously contended that once accused No.1 executed the GPA to Subboji Rao which is registered GPA and based upon the GPA, Subboji Rao sold the land to Balakrishna Naidu and the said Balakrishna Naidu formed the revenue land by obtaining permission from the Village Panchayath and sold the sites to the various persons including the respondent No.2 in these four cases. There is reference available in the sale deed which clearly reveals the property has been sold by accused No.1 through GPA holder. Therefore, with a criminal intention to cause wrongful loss to the complainant and in order to cheat them, accused No.1 executed the gift deed and in turn, accused No.2 executed the sale deed. The matter requires for investiga
