2,
{BY SRLBRAJA SUBRI1J\!L/RNYA BEAT, HCGP RoR..Rg»I':;'_'
SRLSGIKASHIMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R:-2.3 11-
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION. Is _7F'iLEf;s.'V''tiNDER'''' 1'
SECTION 482 CRRC. I>RAYII\Io;To QUASH-1TH'E_EN'TIRE
CHARGE. SHEET IN C.C.No.?55/Q.oi_'0eenniixie
FELE OF' THE JMFC (H COURT) AT' . A " '
THIS CRIMINAL RETITION"'..V_CIo.I;/III§:C{W RCRV
ADMISSION ON THIS DA3f.,.... fii{_E"--._.COURTt_AA1\([_/{DE THE
FOLLOWING: 5 T.
In 482 Cr.P.C., the
petitionerjex iarraigned as Accused
Nos. /on the file of the JMFC~H
for quashing the Criminal
prosecution iaurieheii against them in the said Case.
1 2"? respondent is the step~mother of the
.’Ai.§3’t’petitiVo’neT. The 2114 petitioner is the son of the W
petitiotfigef. After the death of Javaregowda, husband of
2?”? respondent and father of the 15′ petitioner, there
appears to be some dispute between the IS’ petitioner on
the one hand and the 2% respondent on the other hand in
respect of the properties ieft behind by the said
Javaregotvda. In Teepeet of the said dispute, the ‘ISI
_/~”*~.
3
petitioner stated to have filed [amlC’orn_pl.aint
jurisdictional police on Q7ltO€3;20’€)_EI n1al<ing«.ee_.rtain._V
allegations against the 21*" rees:p'ondeni—- 'and,:"heiiTlehiltiren.ll'
However, jurisdictional poliee' s..'l:aVing regard to the
allegations made therein» saiv(;l"li:o _ha'veV.Vregistered a non»-
eognizable Case iS__SL1{,3{}»l10t.iti€«:tQ vthlé 2113 respondent to
appear for any e'nc§ni*r_3n «.
13.3) 2 ‘ It of the petitioners that two
0f U16 5GI_’1S ,0? 2?tl5l”_.~s.rlespondent appeared before the
pvollce on 07’LO9l200§3 and made a statement, which was
‘ ;re<:lVuce('l.pi'n_to.writing and when the matter was still under
*investiga;ti.orr;;.,llithe police appears to have registered the
case. NO¢158/ 2009 against these petitioners for
2 it thepoftences punishable under Sections 304 & 506 r/W. 34
u"§olf"lPC on the basis of the Complaint said to have been
l lodged by the 21" respondent, and toolonp investigations
After completing investigation, it appears, now the police
have filed the Charge sheet against these petitioners for
the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504,506 r/W.
4
34 of IPC it is to quash the said p:oeeedings’,*—-,gthe
petitioners have presented this petition.
4) I have heard the learned .e_oun*sel ford’ ”
the petitioners and perused the re’eor:ds’* “Vmdde”a,.{zatilehleVi’1;t
5) Having heard thew,:leafrned~.eonnsel tor the
petitioners, I find :. otvddlthe grounds
urged in this petition for quashing
the proceedfngslilihln “th.e:d2Hg4¢:A fégpondent’
the petitioners have attracting the
offences I for which: the
has filed charge
sheet:
6] to the facts and circumstances
of «3t.het’*ease Rand” the materials available on record, this
‘ _Co_ti1’t “the opinion that there are sufficient materials
*towproeeedfhagainst these petitioners for the offences
a1i¢.ge’a_ infthe charge sheet. Therefore, I find no grounds
2 it toguash the criminal prosecution launched against these
hpetitionerst In this View of the matter, the petition tacks
merit. Accordingly? the petition is dismissed.
35%
Faégé
KG 111*