THIPPESHAPPA Vs. SRI. HALESHAPPA AND STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 90/2013 pending on the file of JMFC, Hosadurga, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 504 R/w. Sec. 34 of I.P.C. The second respondent -Hosadurga Police on the basis of the first information filed by the first respondent herein registered case in Crime No. 313/2012 against the petitioner and his wife -accused No. 2 and took up the investigation. The said police on completion of the investigation submitted final report before the learned Magistrate, upon which C.C. No. 90/2013 came to be registered against the petitioner and his wife for the aforementioned offences.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that on 25 -10 -2012 at about 8.00 a.m. when the first informant -CW -1 was in his garden, directed this petitioner to remove the barbed fencing wire put on the bund to his garden and at that time this petitioner abused him in filthy language and questioned him as to who is he to ask him to remove the said fencing and on hearing the said galata, when his brother -Basavaraj also came to the said place, the petitioner abused them in filthy language, assaulted him with hands and kicked him with legs and in the mean time accused No. 2 -wife of this petitioner came to the said place and abused them in vulgar language saying that they have come to assault her husband. In the mean time, one Girija and Shashidar intervened and pacified the quarrel. Thus, they have committed the aforementioned offences.

(3.) PER contra, learned State Public Prosecutor submitted that though the material on record does not disclose any offence having been committed for the offences under Sections 323 and 324 of IPC, but the first information and the statement of the witness clearly disclose that they have threatened the complainant with dire consequences. He further submitted that the wife of the petitioner has not approached this Court for seeking quashing of the proceedings. That is another point that goes to show that the petitioner is acquiesced of the offences alleged in the case. However, he submitted, in view of the counter case which is pending between the parties as case and cross case are to be tried together having regard to the facts of the case, it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings. Hence, it be dismissed. It is undisputed that a case and counter case is pending between the petitioner and the first respondent herein. If according to the counsel for the petitioner there is no material placed on record in support of the allegation of the assault, then the Court is at liberty not to frame any charge for the said offences. However, the first information and the Statement of the witnesses clearly reveal that at the time of occurrence this petitioner and his wife have abused the complainant and his brother -Basavaraj in filthy language and have threatened him with dire consequences. The case stands to that extent. In addition, there is counter case pending against the respondent No. 1 herein, instituted on the basis of the complaint filed by the petitioner herein. The accused No. 2 who is the wife of the petitioner has not come before this Court seeking for quashing of the proceedings. Therefore, having regard to the material now on record which clearly disclose that the petitioner and his wife have abused the complainant and his brother -Basavaraj in filthy language and have threatened him with dire consequences, the proceedings in my view at this stage does not deserve to be quashed. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in this petition and it is dismissed.