Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 5803 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: ROOPA W/O MURLI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER ATTICA GOLD COMPANY OFFICE AT SURVARNA BHVANA QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE 560 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOHAMMED TAHIR., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE BY CHANNAMMANAKERE ACCHUKATTE POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OFFICE HIGH COURT COMPLEX OPPOSITE TO VIDHANA SOUDHA
Digitally BANGALORE 560001. signed by VANAMALA N 2. SUBRAMANYA NAIDU Location: S/O LATE G KRISHNAPPA HIGH COURT OF R/AT NO 56, 6TH , MAIN ROAD KARNATAKA KATHRIGUPPE MAIN ROAD VIVEKANANDA NAGAR BANASHANKARI 3RD PHASE BANGALORE 560085. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. THEJESH P,HCGP FOR R1; V/O DATED 28.02.2025 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DTD 25.11.2020 AT ANNX-C FIELD BY THE R-1 CHANNAMANKERE -2-
ACCHUKATTU P.S REGISTERED AS CC NO. 21239/2021 UNDER SEC 380, 411, 342 R/W 34 413 OF IPC ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 138/2020 OF R-1 CHANNAMANAKERE ACCHUKATTU P.S AND THE SAME IS PENDING IN THE FILES OF 37TH ACMM, BANGALORE, WHEREIN THE PETITIONER IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO. 8 QUASH THE COGNIZANCE ORDER DTD 18.08.2021 AT ANNX-D PASSED IN CC NO. 21239/2021 UNDER SEC 380, 411, 342 R/W 34 413 OF IPC ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 138/2020 OF R-1 CHANNAMANAKERE ACCHUKATTU P.S AND THE SAME IS PENDING IN THE FILES OF 37TH ACMM, BANGALORE, WHEREIN THE PETITIONER IS ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO. 8 .
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the charge sheet dated 25.11.2020 and the cognizance order dated 18.08.2021 passed in C.C.No.21239/2021 arising out of Crime No.138/2020 by the respondent No.1 - police pending on the file of the XXXVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. For the order proposed notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the
petitioner viz., Roopa was arraigned as accused No.8 in the charge sheet along with the other accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 380, 342 and 411 read with 34 of IPC. -3-
4. In this context, learned counsel for the petitioner
invited my attention to this Court's order dated 09.06.2022 in W.P.No.19063/2021 as against accused No.7, in view of quashment of criminal proceedings qua accused No.7, the present petitioner who is accused No.8 in C.C.No.21239/2021 would be entitled to seek parity.
5. This Court in the case of P.S.Ayub @ Bommanahalli
Babu Vs. State of Channamanakere Acchukatte Police Station and Another - W.P.No.19063/2021 dated 09.06.2022, quashed the criminal proceedings qua accused No.7 and held as under: "In this petition, the first information report was lodged alleging that the gold jewelleries belonging to the complainant were stolen by the accused and the said accused sold the same to the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd in various branches.
2. The Police registered the FIR in Crime
No.138/2020 and after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner alleging that he is the Director of the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd and as such has committed an offence punishable under Sections 380 and 342 read with Section 34 of IPC. Taking exception to the same this petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company on 01.01.2016 which is evident from Form No.DIR-11 issued by the Registrar of Companies. Hence he submits that the alleged incident has taken place after the petitioner ceased to be Director of the said company and as such the FIR registered against the petitioner is impermissible. -4-
4. Learned HCGP submits that the petitioner
being the Director of the company has received stolen property from the accused and as such has committed the offence alleged against him and at this stage, the FIR registered against the petitioner and the charge sheet submitted against the petitioner does not warrant any interference and sought for dismissal of the petition.
5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
6. To substantiate the claim that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd. to which the stolen property was sold, Form No.DIR-11 issued by
the Registrar of Companies is produced. The said document indicates that the petitioner/accused ceased to be the Director of the company with effect from 01.01.2016. The alleged incident has taken place after the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company in question which is alleged to have received the stolen property.
7. The resignation of the petitioner as Director of
the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd. is evident from Form No.DIR-11. The same has remained uncontroverted and not disputed by the respondents. In the absence of any dispute to the said document, it is implied that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company in question as on the date of the alleged incident. Hence, in the absence of any corroborative material that the petitioner as director of the company in question has received the stolen property, the registration of FIR and also the filing of charge sheet is without any substance.
8. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The Writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.138/2020 is quashed. iii) Liberty is reserved with the respondent State to proceed against the company which is alleged to have received the stolen property in accordance with law, if so advised." -5-
5. In the instant case, it is an undisputed fact that
proceedings as against accused No.7 has been quashed by this Court in W.P.No.19063/2021 and consequently, by applying the doctrine of parity, proceedings against the petitioner - accused No.8 in this petition also deserves to be quashed.
6. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned charge sheet dated 25.11.2020 and
the cognizance order dated 18.08.2021 passed in C.C.No.21239/2021 arising out of Crime No.138/2020 by the respondent No.1 - police pending on the file of the XXXVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, qua the petitioner are hereby quashed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE RB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 47