PRABINA KUMAR PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1, 10 and 11 in C.C.No.53018/2016 arising out of Cr.No.240/2011 of Hennur P.S. for the offences punishable under Sections 418, 419, 420, 465, 468, 467, 474 and 120B read with Section 34 of the IPC, 1860. This petition is filed seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.53018/2016 pending before the Court of the XI ACMM, Bangalore.

(2.) Factual matrix of the prosecution case is as under:

(3.) Heard the learned Senior counsel Shri Hashmath Pasha for the petitioners and the learned HCGP for Respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 is represented by Shri Gireesha N who is on record. But however, Respondent No.2 / Smt. Minnie Varghese is arraigned as the complainant in C.C.No.53018/2016. Therefore, as per Section 301 of the Cr.P.C., the role of the counsel for Respondent No.2 is only to a limited extent who could not independently address the arguments but only to assist the learned HCGP for Respondent No.1 who is on record and represents the State. Therefore, the arguments on the part of Respondent No.1 by HCGP for the State has been heard, which shall also take care of the arguments of Respondent No.2, keeping in view Section 301 of the Cr.P.C.