AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORAL ORDER
Criminal Petition No.100632/2023 is filed by the petitioner/accused No.2, whereas Criminal Petition No.100585/2023 is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 482 of CrPC /Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, seeking to quash the order dated 16.02.2018 taking cognizance and consequently to quash entire proceedings in C.C.No.134/2018 in connection with Crime No.148/2016 of Bhatkal Rural Police Station, pending on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Bhatkal, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471, 193, 417, 420, 109 read with Section 34 of IPC.
The brief facts of the prosecution case in nutshell are as under:
The defacto complainant is the husband of accused No.1, he filed private complaint in PCR No.236/2016 alleging that accused No.1 in colluding with accused No.2 filed Criminal Misc.Nos.173/2014 and 174/2014 before the JMFC Court at Bhatkal, seeking issuance of birth certificate of accused No.1 and accused No.2’s name in the father column. On the basis of the above facts, the defacto complainant has filed the above complaint. The matter was referred to police under Section 156 of Cr.P.C. for investigation. The Investigating Officer investigated the matter and filed charge sheet against those persons. Taking exceptions to the same, the petitioners are filed these petitions.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that, the petitioners are falsely implicated in the case and that there are no materials so as to connect the petitioners to the crime. The charge sheet material also does not disclose the commission of alleged offence. Hence, learned counsel for petitioners prayed to allow the petitions.
Per contra, learned HCGP contended that the charge sheet material clearly discloses the commission of alleged offence. The veracity of allegation against the accused can be considered only after trial. Now, the Trial Court took cognizance and framed charges against the petitioners. Hence, the petitions are not maintainable and prayed to dismiss the petitions.
The perusal of the material available on record, more particularly the order sheet, would show that the charges are framed and the matter is set down for the evidence. This aspect is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Therefore, framing of charges signifies that the Court after perusing the charge sheet material believes that there is sufficient reason to proceed with the trial. Once charges are framed, it is not just and proper to quash the entire proceedings as the petitioners are disputing the question of fact, which cannot be gone into under corroborating circumstances. Hence, there is no merit in the petitions.
Accordingly, the Court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
The criminal petitions are dismissed.
Pending IAs., if any, stand is disposed of as they do not survive for any consideration.