Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 51246

1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8592/2021
BETWEEN:
1.
SHARATH KUMAR C.L
S/O LAKSHMANA R
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN
MOTHER SMT B.C JYOTHI
W/O R.LAKSHMANA
2.
SRI. VIJEYANDRA @ VIJENDRA KUMAR C.G
S/O GAJENDRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
3.
SRI. SWAMY @ MUDALAIAH C.M
S/O MUDLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
4.
SRI. MUDHUSUDHAN @ MADHUSUDHAN.G

S/O GAJENDRA

AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT :
CHIKKAGANGAWADI VILLAGE
DODDAGANGAWADI POST, KUTAGAL HOBLI
RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT 562 159
...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. RUDRAPPA.P, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RAMANAGARA RURAL POLICE STATION
RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT 562 132
REPRESENTED BY ITS S P P
2
HIGH COURT BUILDING
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU 562 159
2.
SMT. MUTHURAJAMMA
W/O SHIVARAJU
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
RESIDING AT CHIKKAGANGAWADI VILLAGE
DODDAGANGAWADI POST
KUTAGAL HOBLI
RAMANAGARA TALUK AND DISTRICT 562 159

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.194/2021 REGISTERED BY THE
RAMANAGAR RURAL POLICE STATION, RAMANAGAR TALUK AND
DISTRICT AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCES P/U/S.323,324,354,504,506 R/W SEC.34 OF IPC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

An FIR should not be quashed at the initial stage without allowing the investigation to proceed, unless there are strong grounds to do so.

Headnote:
QUASHING OF FIR - SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. - FIR CANNOT BE QUASHED AT INITIAL STAGE WITHOUT INVESTIGATION - INGREDIENTS OF OFFENCES MADE OUT - CIVIL SUIT PENDING NOT SUFFICIENT GROUND FOR QUASHING FIR
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought to quash an FIR registered against them for offences under Sections 323, 324, 354, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging assault, abuse, and dragging of the complainant and her family members. The petitioners contended that a civil dispute was ongoing between them and the complainant.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the complainant had made specific allegations of assault and abuse against the petitioners, and that the ingredients of the offences were prima facie made out. The court held that the mere pendency of a civil suit was not sufficient ground for quashing the FIR without allowing the investigation to proceed.
Issues: Whether the FIR should be quashed at the initial stage without investigation, despite the presence of ingredients of offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle that an FIR should not be quashed at the initial stage without allowing the investigation to proceed, unless there are strong grounds to do so. The court held that the pendency of a civil suit alone was not sufficient to warrant quashing the FIR.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, reserving liberty to the petitioners to challenge the charge sheet if filed.

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1

to 4 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking for quashing the

FIR in Crime No.194/2021 registered by Ramanagar Rural

Police Station, Ramanagar, pending on the file of I

Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC Court, Ramanagara

District, for the offences punishable under Sections 323,

324, 354, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal

Code.

2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the

petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for

the respondent-State.

The case of the prosecution is that on the

complaint of one Smt.Muthurajamma, the police have

registered the case alleging that, there was civil dispute

between the complainant and the petitioners-accused, on

29.08.2021 at about 9.30 p.m, her son Yashwanth aged

about 11 years came for Shravana Pooja at the house of

complainant's relative i.e., her sister-in-law. At that time

the accused persons said to have quarreled with her son

and assaulted him. Then the complainant went to the said

place for rescuing her son but the accused have assaulted

her, abused in filthy language, holding her hair and dragged

her holding the saree, she raised alarm, when her husband

came for rescue, at that time the accused persons also

assaulted complainant's husband. Accused Madhusudan

assaulted one Vasanth Kumar with club and caused injuries.

Then the complainant went to the hospital and took the

treatment. Therefore, she sought for action against the

accused persons.

After registering the case, the investigation by

the police which is under challenge.

Upon hearing the arguments of learned counsel

for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader

and on perusal of the records, it reveals that the

complainant has categorically stated that accused persons

have assaulted her son, when she went there they also

assaulted her. On hearing the noise, her husband came for

her rescue, then the petitioners-accused also assaulted him

and also one Vasanth Kumar with club. On perusal of the

same, ingredients are made out by the complainant for

investigating the matter by the Investigating Officer for the

offences under Sections 323, 324, 354, 504, 506 read with

34 of IPC and merely, because a civil suit is pending, that

itself is not sufficient for quashing the FIR without going into

the investigation and allowing the Investigating Officer to

file the final report. Such being the case, at the initial stage

itself this Court cannot exercise Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for

quashing the FIR.

With

the

above

observation,

the

criminal

petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioners for

challenging the charge sheet.

Consequent

the

disposal

main

petition,

I.A.No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration and

accordingly, it is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

SKS

Click Here to Read the rest of this document