Proceedings involving Sections 353 and 384 of the IPC are liable to be quashed when the charge sheet fails to demonstrate the essential ingredients, such as the use of criminal force or a direct link between the alleged extortion amount and the accused.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.4278/2021 (IN GADAG TOWN P.S. CR.NO.62/2021) PENDING ON THE FILE OF 1ST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC-1 COURT, GADAG, FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 353, 384, 109 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC IN THE INTERSET OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner, the sole accused, is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.4278/2021, registered for offences punishable under Sections 353, 384, 109 read with 34 of the IPC. The only charge that survives against the petitioner is the offence punishable under Section 353 of the IPC.

2. Heard Sri.Anil Kale, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State and Sri.Srinivas Naik, learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant.

3. The brief facts germane are as follows:

4. This Court, on 10.08.2023, had passed the following order:

1. “The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C. No.4278/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 353, 384, 109 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel Shri Anil Kale appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP Shri V.S. Kalasuramath representing the respondent – State.

3. Facts in brief, germane are as follows:

The petitioner claims to be an Activist engaged in the Right to Information Services (for short “the RTI”). The petitioner files an application seeking certain information against the complainant under the RTI with regard to certain activities of the complainant, which according to the petitioner was contrary to law. Seeking of information of the complainant by the petitioner leads the complainant to register the complaint against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 353 & 384 of the IPC alleging that the petitioner has demanded money in exchange of certain information, failing which he has threatened him that he would divulge the said information. The complaint then becomes a crime in Crime No.62/2021 for the afore quoted offences. The Police after investigation have filed a charge sheet in C.C. No.4278/2021. Filing of the charge sheet against the petitioner is what drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Learned counsel Shri Anil Kale representing the petitioner would contend with vehemence that the recovery of amount of Rs.40,000/- is made from the house of the petitioner, not the same day, not the next day, but after about a month of the alleged incident. Therefore, he would submit that it cannot be linked to the alleged demand or extortion. It is his case that there is no extortion in the case at hand. The complainant only to wreck vengeance, on the ground that the petitioner has sought information about his alleged misdeeds has registered the subject complaint. 5.

5. Learned HCGP on the other hand would seek to refute the submissions to contend that the petitioner claiming to be the RTI Activist has indulged in extortion as he has demanded money, failing which he would divulge the information that would be detrimental to the complainant. Therefore, in the process, he has stopped the public servant from performing his duties. He would submit that the Police have filed a charge sheet and further proceedings should be permitted to be continued against the petitioner.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments addressed on both sides and also perused the material available on record.

7. T