K.V.RAMANI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by petitioner/accused No.5 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the order dated 18.3.2017 passed by the LXV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangaluru (CCH-66) in Sessions Case No.177/2014 produced as per Annexure 'C' and consequently, discharge the petitioner-accused No.5 of the offences alleged under Section 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the petition are that, petitioner's son and one Sri.Sathya.C.Muthu (now deceased) and one Sri.Ashok T entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 7.4.2011 for the supply of BPO Voice. As per the said MoU, it was mutually agreed that Sri.Sathya.C.Muthu and Sri.Ashok.T would be organizing and supplying BPO Voice projects to the petitioner's son and upon successful completion of the project, Sri.Sathya.C.Muthu and Sri.Ashok T would be paid a sum of Rs.26 lakhs. It was also mutually agreed vide the same MoU that any breach or failure to perform the contract by either party contemplated a situation where the party failing to fulfill its obligations as per the contract would be liable to pay a penalty of Rs.30 lakhs. Since the deceased Sri.Sathya.C.Muthu failed to fulfill his obligations under the contract, he was therefore liable to pay money to the petitioner's son as stated above. Such being the case, petitioner had gone to collect rent of ground floor of his house at Kumaraswamy layout on 13.5.2012 wherein he was summoned to Srirampura police station (the respondent herein) on the ground that an alleged First Information Report was registered inter alia against the petitioner and his son under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code based upon a purported complaint dated 18.6.2011 given by one Sri.Chandrashekar on the basis of an alleged suicide note stating that Sri.Sathya C.Muttu had killed himself due to financial pressure naming the petitioner, his son and others as accused. Pertinently, on 11.6.2011, the said Sri.Chandrashekar had given a complaint reporting the death of his son and also stating that he do not suspect anyone. Again, subsequently on 18.6.2011 he filed another complaint based on the death note. On the basis of the said FIR, charge sheet was filed by the respondent and thereafter, matter was committed to the Sessions Court. During the course of trial, petitioner filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking for discharge. The respondent took two years for completion of investigation and statement of the petitioner was recorded after an year from the alleged incident. Moreover, the ingredients of Sections 306 r/w Section 34 of IPC were not made out and there were no material evidence on record and the prosecution case had serious lacuna. Despite the same, the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 18.3.2017 has dismissed the application for discharge filed by the petitioner and his son. Aggrieved by the same, the present petition is filed.

(3.) Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.5 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State.