SHIVAPUTRAPPA Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C. No. 225/2013 (arising out of P.C. No. 32/2008) pending on the file of JMFC, Shorapur.

(2.) THE brief factual matrix that emanate from the records are that complainant - Ramappa S/o. Mahantappa Allipur lodged a private complaint in P.C. No. 32/2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 427, 380, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. The said private complaint appears to have been referred to the police for investigation and report. The jurisdictional police, after due investigation, submitted 'B' final report specifically stating that complaint allegations are false and the parties are fighting for their remedies before the civil Court and they are in the habit of lodging complaints against each other. After filing of 'B' summary report, the complainant has contested the proceedings by filing protest petition. The sworn statement of the complainant was recorded before the Court. Ramappa was examined as PW 1 and Gowramma was examined as P.W. 2. They have reiterated the complaint allegations stating that on 17.07.2008, the mother of the complainant went to their land situated at Sy. No. 9/Aa measuring 12 acres 28 guntas of Badlapur village, Tq. Shorapur. At that time, accused Nos. 1 to 4 started cutting and removing Neem trees and two Advi sandalwood trees. When the mother of the complainant obstructed the accused, they abused her in filthy language and they have also threatened the complainant and his mother with dire consequences etc. On the basis of the complaint averments and sworn statement, the learned Magistrate has rejected 'B' summary report, took cognizance of the offences and issued summons calling upon the accused persons to explain as to why action should not be taken against them in accordance with law. At that juncture, the present petition is filed.

(3.) SRI S.S. Mamadapur, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 has submitted that there is no dispute with regard to the pendency of the suits between the parties and disposal of those cases. But he submits that the allegations made in the complaint and the sworn statement constitute offences alleged, therefore, this Court relying upon the extraneous documents cannot quash the proceedings.