Mallikarjuna and Others vs State and Others

K.N. Phaneendra, J.—When the case is called, petitioners and their counsel remained absent.

The learned High Court Government Pleader assisted the Court by taking through the contents of the first information report and other records.

I have carefully perused the grounds of the petition as well as the records.

The petitioners have sought for quashing of the entire proceedings in F.I.R. No. 267/2014 registered by Basavana Bagewadi Police in Crime No. 267/2014 against the petitioners herein for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 354, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 of I.P.C.

The petition averments show that the petitioners have claimed that the first information report was filed falsely implicating the petitioners and even considering the contents of the first information report it does not disclose any cognizable offence against the petitioners. The said complaint is filed due to private vengeance and the parties are fighting for their cause before the Civil Court and they are filing complaint against each other. Therefore, the first information report is not tenable and the same is liable to be quashed.

The basic principles to be followed in order to quash any criminal proceedings while exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., are that, on perusal of the entire materials on record, if the Court is of the opinion that the allegations made in the complaint or in the first information report does not constitute any offence under any penal laws for the time being in force, or even after going through the contents of the first information report, if the Court is of the opinion that the allegations are vague which are not sufficient to come to any conclusion that any cognizable offence is made out, or if the Court is of the opinion that sufficient materials are placed to show that only due to private vengeance without there being any incident being happened, a false complaint has been lodged against the petitioners, or the investigation is initiated against any law for the time being in force or if the investigating agency has no jurisdiction to investigate the case.

Perusal of the complaint averments shows one Madevappa S/o. Gurappa Bandivaddar of Hulabenchi village in Basavana Bagweadi Taluk has lodged the first information report stating that himself, his brothers and his family members have been residing in the said village. It is stated that on 15.08.2014 at about 10.30 a.m. when they were proceeding to their land, accused Nos. 1 and 2 namely, Mallikarjun and Shivakumar came and intercepted their way and restrained them from moving anywhere and abused them in filthy language particularly, referring to the caste of the complainant and caught hold the womenfolk of the complainant''s family, outraged their modesty and assaulted them etc. At that time, the other accused i.e., accused Nos. 3 to 13 who are related to accused No. 1 also joined their hands with accused No. 1, assaulted the family members of the complainant particularly, Nagamma and Yallamma, outraged their modesty and abused them in filthy language by referring to their caste name. On these allegations, the first information report has been filed and the police have started investigation.

On plain reading of the complaint averments, I am of the opinion that, at this stage, the Court cannot come to the conclusion that no allegations are there which constitute offences alleged. There is specific allegations with regard to the abusive words being used particularly, filthy language used referring to their caste and assault being made and threatening call has been given by the accused persons. Therefore, the allegations made in the first information report constitute offences, so as to investigate the matter to ascertain the truth or falsity of the contents of the first information report. This Court is debarred from considering the truth or falsity of the allegations made in the complaint.

Of-course, there are certain material placed before the Court i.e., photographs and compact disc. But the photographs and compact disc cannot be taken into consideration at this stage. Any material placed before the Court by way of documents, those should be conclusive in nature so as to be relied upon at this stage, because, this Court by relying upon extraneous materials if the proceedings are quashed, it virtually amounts to acquittal of the accused without providing an opportunity to the State or the complainant. Therefore, I do not want to venture upon to do such an act by exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Of-course, some materials are placed to show that parties are fighting with each other by way of filing suits with respect to some immovable properties and subsequently, petitioner No. 2 has also filed a complaint against respondent No. 2 in Crime No. 327/2014. The same was registered and being investigated by the same police. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances of the case, when the allegations constitute offences even broadly accepting the facts, this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings. It is worth to note here a recent decision of the Apex Court reported in Amit Kapoor Vs. Ramesh Chander and Another, , the Apex Court at paragraph 27.13 has held that:

"Quashing of a charge is an exception to the rule of continuous prosecution. Where the offence is even broadly satisfied, the Court should be more inclined to permit continuation of prosecution rather than its quashing at that initial stage. The Court is not expected to marshal the records with a view to decide admissibility, reliability and acceptability of the materials on record. But it is only opinion formed prima facie." 10. Therefore, under the above said circumstances, considering the nature of the allegations and the facts of the case and the materials produced, I am reluctant to quash the proceedings. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.