DILLEPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.

(2.) THE present petition is filed seeking relief to quash the entire proceedings in CC No.245/2013 pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and Prl. JMFC, Ranebennur, registered against the petitioners for the offencee punishable under Sectione 143, 147, 109, 427, 448, 450, 395 r/w 195 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(3.) THE brief factual matrix that emanate from the records are that, there was some dispute between complainant -Manjunath Puthanikar with other village people in respect of the complainant selling his land to one Malthesh. It is alleged that the village people developed grudge against this complainant. On previous occasion, that is prior to the incident also during Shivaratri Festival, some village people have tress passed into the cloth shop of the complainant and caused lot of loss to the complainant. It is further alleged that on 13/8/2013, when there was a fair (Jatra) taking place in the village, it is alleged that the persons who participated in the said fair along with the accused persons named in the complaint, about 25 persons have trespassed into the shop of the complainant and destroyed the articles inside the shop, throw away the cloths and also committed robbery of some gold articles and burnt the cloths by throwing the cloths outside the said shop and caused loss to an extent of Rs.2,50,000/ -. Though some discrepancies are there in the first information report, as to who are all other persons present along with the accused persons, nevertheless, the present of these petitioners are spoken to in the FIR. After registering the case, in Crime No.131/2013, the police have investigated the matter and recorded the statement of the eye -witnesses, conducted the spot panchanama, etc., and found that there were sufficient materials to support the first information report filed by the complainant. It appears after filing of the charge sheet, the learned Magistrate took cognizance and issued summons to the accused persons. In pursuance of the same, the accused persons have appeared before the learned Magistrate and they were enlarged on bail. Now, the case is pending before the judicial Court. Looking to the above said facts and circumstances, when some materials are available, this Court while exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot evaluate the evidence and statement of the witnesses. However, the Court while hearing the accused persons, before framing of the charges can prima facie come to the conclusion, whether even translating the statement of the witnesses into evidence, whether any offence is made out against the accused persons in order to frame charges and put the accused person on trial. In fact, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a decision Amit Kapoor Vs. Ramesh Chander and another, 2012 9 SCC 460, particularly, at paragraph 27.13 has guided the High Courts under what circumstances, the charge sheet can be quashed, which reads thus: -