AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H.S. Kempanna, J.—The petitioners have sought for quashing of the proceedings in CC. No. 563/2012 pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Piriapatana, which case has been registered for the offences under Sections 143, 504, 341, 323, 324 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. It is the case of the prosecution that these petitioners, who are close relatives of the second respondent/complainant being his brother and nephews on 23.8.2011 at about 1.35 a.m. when the complainant was in his lands situated at Kaggandi village, came to the land and in furtherance of their common intention, picked up quarrel, abused him in filthy language and also assaulted him with chopper on his head, eyes and hands and caused him injuries.
Learned counsel, for the petitioners vehemently contends that the petitioners have also filed first information before the police alleging that on the same date, time and place they were assaulted by the second respondent and in that connection, the police have registered the case against the second respondent in Crime No. 192/2011 for the offences under Sections 341, 504, 324, 307 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. When the second respondent was arrested in the said case, he has filed the false complaint as counter blast to the complaint filed by the petitioners. He further submits that the injuries sustained by the petitioners at the hands of the second respondent are very serious. In the light of the same, as the present complaint has been filed as a counter blast to the complaint filed by the petitioners, the case now launched against these petitioners, which is pending in C.C. No. 563/2012 be quashed. At the time of hearing and on perusal of the entire papers produced along with this petition, it does not disclose, the counsel for the petitioners having filed the entire papers which are filed u/s 173 of Cr. P.C. before the Jurisdictional Magistrate except filing the facing sheet of the charge sheet, which does not indicate the entire case of the prosecution. However, the submission of the learned counsel itself goes to show that the case and cross-case has been registered, investigation is completed and charge sheet has been filed in both the cases. It is settled position of law that the case and cross-case are to be tried together. In that view of the matter, in the absence of the entire police papers filed u/s 173 of Cr. P.C., this Court is unable to come to the conclusion that no case is made out against the petitioners for quashing of the case launched against the petitioners. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed.