IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA WRIT PETITION NO. 22834 OF 2022 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

HARIHARA PALANI S/O PALANIMURTHY SHANMUGAM AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 1886/15 20TH B CROSS,21ST MAIN VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560040 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJESH KUMAR S.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY INDIRANAGAR POLICE INDIRANAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU 560038.

Digitally signed by SWAPNA V

2. H VINAYAK NAYAK Location: high court of S/O SRI VISWANATH NAYAK karnataka AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS RESIDING AT NO 201,VESPERS

11/1, EAGLE STREET LONGFORD TOWN, BENGALURU.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1;

SRI. G C HARSHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WP FILED PRAYING TOQUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DTD

11.07.2017 APPENDED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-C AND ORDER DTD 10.06.2021 PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYO HALL AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.52876/2021 TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 420 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE APPENDED HERETO AS ANNEXURE-D AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner being the sole accused is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in Crime No.28/2015 of Indiranagar police station, now pending in C.C.No.52876 of 2021, on the file of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offence under Section 420 of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 filed the complaint with Indiranagar police station against the accused alleging commission of the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC. On the basis of complaint the First Information Report was registered, the investigation was undertaken and the charge sheet came to be filed for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC.

3. It is the contention of the prosecution that, the petitioner is a Gym trainer, who came in contact with the wife and mother-in-law of the complainant. The accused won their confidence proclaiming that he is very close to Reebok company and is in a position to get the gym equipments free of cost. He also promised that if a gym centre is opened, the investors can make profit out of it. Believing the words of the petitioner, the wife and mother- in-law of the complainant invested and started a gym centre by getting the premises on lease by entering into the lease agreement on 27-06-2013. Subsequently, on 22.01.2014, the petitioner, with an intention to cheat the investors, entered into a supplementary lease agreement with the owner of the premises, claiming that he himself is the owner of the gym centre.

4. It is also stated that the petitioner entered into the Memorandum of Understanding with Reebok Company on 24.06.2014 without the knowledge of CWs-1 and 2, proclaiming himself as the owner of gym centre and managed to get the equipment installed in the premises that was taken on lease by CWs-1 & 2. The petitioner was inducing the customers who were coming to the gym centre not to attend the gym centre but to contact him personally as he can give gym training for half of the amount. Under such circumstances, the fitness centre established by CWs-1 and 2 could not make any profit and suffered loss. When they wanted to sell the gym centre, the accused started to adopt arm-twisting tactics and CW1 came to know that the accused had entered into an agreement with JW Marriot proclaiming that he is the owner of the Centre. Thereby, he has cheated CWs-1 and 2 and accordingly, committed the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC. The petitioner is before this Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him.

5. Heard Sri Ajesh Kumar S, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. G.C. Harsha, learned