AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Sri Santosh B.Malligawad, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Praveena Y.Devareddiyavara, learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State and Sri Sabeel Ahmed, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
The petitioners/accused No.1 to 4 have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.42/2020 pending on the file of learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Siruguppa, Bellary, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 326, 355, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
The brief facts of the prosecution case in nutshell are as under:
On 16.04.2019, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint alleging that on 15.04.2019 in the afternoon that is at 01:30 p.m. when the defacto complainant was proceeding towards his house, accused No.1 came in his motorcycle bearing No.KA-34/EJ-8592, picked up a quarrel with defacto complainant, abused him in filthy language and dashed against the defacto complainant with his motorcycle and caused severe injury. Hence, CWs.4 to 8 pacified the quarrel. Further, accused No.1 also assaulted the defacto complainant with rod on the right knee of the defacto complainant and caused grievous injury. Hence, he lodged the complaint. This led to registration of FIR and investigation. Taking exceptions to the same, the petitioners have filed this petition seeking to quash the entire proceedings.
Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the Trial Court took cognizance mechanically against all the accused persons without there being any material on record and the Trial Court has not applied judicious mind. Further, the charge sheet does not make out any prima facie case against the petitioners and the involvement or culpability of the accused persons in the crime. Further, the ingredients of Sections 341, 323, 326, 355, 504 of IPC are also not attracted. There is case and counter case between the parties. Initially accused No.1 lodged complaint against the defacto complainant in Crime No.77/2019, wherein the Investigating Officer filed the ‘B’ report and in the complaint filed by the defacto complainant, the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet against the petitioners herein. Further in both the crimes, the Investigating Officers are different, which is not permissible under law. Hence, the learned counsel prayed to quash the entire proceedings.
Learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State and learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently contended that there is prima facie allegation against the petitioners and they are involved in the alleged offences. Hence, learned HCGP prayed for dismissal of the petition.
The perusal of the entire charge sheet material discloses that the statement of defacto complainant and the statement of CWs.4 to 8 clearly demonstrated that on the day of incident accused No.1 took quarrel with the defacto complainant, dashed him with his motorcycle and also assaulted with rod on the left knee of the defacto complainant and caused grievous injuries. None of these witnesses have stated about the individual overt-act of accused No.2 to 4, in their statements. Hence, the ingredient of Sections 341, 323, 326, 355, 504 and 406 of IPC are not attracted against accused No.2 to 4 are concerned.
At the time of incident, accused No.2 to 4 were present at the scene of offence. Further, mere expression of any words without any intention to cause alarm to the complainant or to make him to do will not follow the definition of criminal intimidation. In view of the preceding analysis, this court is of the considered opinion that the criminal prosecution foisted against accused No.2 to 4 is without any probable cause and the entire allegation is against accused No.1. Hence, continuation of criminal proceedings against accused No.2 to 4 is nothing but an abuse of process of law and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
The criminal petition is allowed in part.
The entire criminal proceedings in C.C.No.42/2020 pending on the file of learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Siruguppa, Bellary, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 326, 355, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC are hereby quashed insofar as petitioners No.2 to 4/accused No.2 to 4 are concerned.
The criminal case to be continued against petitioner No.1/accused No.1.
In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly, they are dismissed.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Trial Court forthwith.