Venkatesh vs State Of Karnataka & Others

H.P. Sandesh, J

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to quash the order dated 24.09.2020 and further proceedings in

C.C.No.3107/2020 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Doddaballapura and grant such other reliefs as deemed fit in the circumstances

of the case.

he factual matrix of the case is that respondent No.2 had lodged a complaint dated 12.05.2020 with respondent No.1 making the allegations against

the petitioner that on 11.05.2020 in the evening when she was standing near her house, he came in a car and made indecent sign and when the

complainant questioned the same, he abused in a filthy language and came to assault her and she went inside the house and closed the door. The

complainant told him that she would lodge the complaint and hence he threatened the complainant. After 20 minutes, he came along with his friends

and abused and threatened her. Based on the complaint, the police have registered the case on 30.05.2020. On perusal of the original complaint, an

endorsement is made that they have conducted preliminary enquiry and registered the case on 30.05.2020. The police after the registration of the

case, investigated the matter and filed the charge-sheet. Hence, the present petition is filed before this Court by the petitioner/accused.

The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court photograph at Annexure-C wherein the husband of the complainant had put

up the construction illegally and in this regard a compliant is given orally by the petitioner herein. The CMC, Doddaballapura has issued notice against

the husband of the complainant on 24.01.2020, second notice was issued on 10.02.2020 and third notice was issued on 16.05.2020 and ultimately on

16.05.2020 the CMC, Doddaballapura passed a temporary order to remove the illegal structure put up by the husband of the complainant. The police

have also issued the acknowledgment for having received the complaint from the petitioner dated 21.05.2020, wherein the issuance of notice and oral

complaint made by the petitioner against the husband of the complainant has been stated and no action was taken by the police. However, the police

have registered the case against the petitioner based on the complaint of the wife of the person, who had indulged in illegal activities. Hence, the

learned counsel would contend that it is a clear case of abuse by the police wherein by taking the pre-dated complaint, case has been registered on

30.05.2020.

The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his arguments relied upon the judgment of the Delhi High Court passed in Criminal M.C.

No.692/2014 dated 24.09.2018 in the case of Hari Kishen Sharma v. State and another and brought to the notice of this Court paragraph Nos.14

and 15 of the judgment, wherein invoking of Sections 506 and 509 of IPC is discussed and the Court held that the allegations made by the prosecutrix

of the offence under Section 506, 509 are as vague as they can be. Prosecutrix has not stated as to what were the words uttered or gestures, actions

or threat extended which would satisfy the requirement of Sections 506 and 509 IPC. The learned counsel referring this judgment would contend that

this judgment is aptly applicable to the case on hand and it is a clear abuse of process.

The learned counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.138/2020 arising out of SLP (Crl)

No.3974/2018 in the case of Ahmad Ali Quraishi and another v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and another, wherein the Apex Court discussed

with regard to abuse of process referring the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others

and allowed the appeal and quashed the proceedings.

Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 State would submit that preliminary enquiry was conducted

before registration of the case and hence there was a delay in registering the case. The complaint is given on 12.05.2020 and specific allegation is

made in the complaint regarding indecent signs made by the petitioner herein and the police have also investigated the mater and filed the charge-sheet

citing eye-witnesses to the incident.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 State and also

on perusal of the material i.e., Annexures-C to H, it is clear that this petitioner had orally given the complaint to CMC, Doddaballapura for illegal

construction put up by the husband of the complainant. Based on the complaint, notices are issued against the husband of the complainant and

ultimately a temporary order has been passed to remove the illegal construction put up by the husband of the complainant. Annexure-H discloses that

the complaint was given by the petitioner before the CMC, Doddaballapura for illegal construction put up by the husband of the complainant. This

complaint is nothing but off shoot of the complaint and the notice issued against the husband of the complainant and passing the order to remove the

construction illegally put up by the husband of the complainant. The police have also failed to take note of the fact that the endorsement was issued in

favour of the petitioner, but the complaint is received against the petitioner herein and on perusal of the complaint averments, there is no any indecent

signs made against the complainant and the judgment of the Delhi High Court is aptly applicable to the case on hand, wherein it is observed that in

order to invoke Section 509 and 506 of IPC, the prosecutrix has not stated as to what were the words uttered or gestures, actions or threat extended

which would satisfy the requirement of Section 506 and 509 IPC. In the case on hand, no such indecent sign is referred in the complaint. It is brought

to the notice of this Court that an allegation is made that after 20 minutes of the said incident, the petitioner came along with other friends and abused

and threatened the complainant, but case is filed only against the petitioner and no other accused are arraigned even though there was an allegation in

the complaint against others and there is no any explanation also. Having taken note of the material collected by the Investigating Officer, it is nothing

but sheer misuse of power vested with the police. It is a classic example of how the police act based on the complaint in favour of the persons who

can manage the police people and it is an abuse of process.

Having taken note of the material on record, it is a fit case to give direction to the Superintendent of Police of Bangalore Rural District or

appropriate authority to enquire into the matter regarding abuse of process by the Investigating Officer in registering the case against a person who

gives the complaint with regard to violation in construction of illegal structure and instead of taking action against the person who has illegally put up

the construction, registered the case against the petitioner herein with an oblique motive and suppress the voice of the petitioner herein. Hence, the

Superintendent of Police of Bangalore Rural District is directed to hold an enquiry against the police officer, who indulged in registering false case in

abuse of his powers. Having considered the material on record, it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. If this Court does

not exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., it amounts to an abuse of process, which leads to miscarriage of justice. Hence, the very

initiation of the proceedings against the petitioner herein requires to be quashed.

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The proceedings initiated against the petitioner herein in C.C.No.3107/2020 is hereby quashed.

(iii) The concerned Superintendent of Police or appropriate authority is directed to initiate the proceedings against the Investigating Officer, who

conducted the investigation and filed the charge-sheet in clear abuse of process and submit the report taking the action before this Court within three

months from today.

In view of allowing of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2021 for stay does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of.