IN THE HIGH COUET OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 9'" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009'"---.»
BEFORE
'mE HON'BLE MEJUSTICE HULUVADI G. "
CRL.P. No.2o27/2005 C/W. CRL.-P';"NG..39_80/fiche AND
CRL.P. N0.72367.20Q_§,
CRL.P.NO.2027/2005:
BETWEEN
1. A ARVIND RAO .7
s/0 A RAMESHRAG
AGED ABOUT 4,5 YEARS»
R/{O N0 G188/A,i*~;_' _ " .
6TH MAIN DE'£?ENCE.Ct').LOE\IY
INDIRANAGAR; ._ __
BANGALORE "38 " A -- ...PETI'1'IONER
SR1 RAIVIACEJANDRA MALI, ADVOCATE)
SEESHAGIRI NAYAK
. 'S/0" NOT KNOWN
' ._AGED 53. YEARS
LINEIMATH GALLI
SIRSIL ...RESPONDENT
V. _ SR1 S R HEGDE HUDLAMANE, ADVOCATE)
y
CRL.P.NO.2027/2005 FIEED U/S.40’7 R/W 482 cR.P.c
BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT
THIS I-ION’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE
COMPLAINT/PROCEEDINGS IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER
IS CONCERNED IN C.C.I\¥O.3860/2004 (
ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. JMFC., SIRSI.
CRL
PCR NO. 126/2004)
.P.I\EO.3980/2006
BETWEEN
1.
A ARVIND RAO
S /O A RAMESHRAO
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
R/AT NO.188/A, 6TH MAIN,_ A A.
DEFENCE COLONY, INDIRANAGAR; V
BANGALORE 38. V’
(BY SR1 RAMACHANDRA 1\_«iAL_I, L’ADT/EJCATE)
STATE’ BY’ RS1 ‘EXTENSION BELGAUM
(DELETED VIDITORCDAER DATED 1 1.9.2006)
NICKHAT RATIVMA
L_’jW./ ABDUL ‘RA-HMAN SOUNKAD
AGED 3_1’=YEARS,
” e~»2,/_3~,L QUARTERS,
~ . v«.L-_NEA.R-WATER TANK,
1 VISHVVESHWARA NAGAR,
“‘BEL_€§3»AUM. RESPONDENT
T F.V’.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R-1 DELETED)
, ~ _ ‘”CARL.R.NO.39S0/2006 FILED U/S482 CR.P.C BY THE
OCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS
JR,»
” §.PEfrI*fIONER V
THE ABOVE PETITIONS fiRE COMING ON FOR ORDERS
THIS DAY, THE COURT FOLLOWING:
The petitioner has sought to quash the
complaints/proceedings against him in
3860/2004, C.C.No.462/2004 and
According to the petitioner, he I-Iono1*a:3r_,
Director of M / s. Karnataka
Mr. Sadashiva Rao is the Chairman._of the
Mr. Ra;’aram”is thev~–E’xecutive Director, who
iooked afte’r,’da3r of the company. It is the
contentioniiof “the, that he never signed the
questio’r1’*’*’and apart from that, he has also
order on 29.1.2004 directing that
the ppetitivoneij shall not be represented as a Director.
A as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned,
A jthe–._aforesaid complaints are filed against the petitioner
Jib’
S
and other persons and in reply to the said complaints, the
petitioner has produced the resignation letter tendered to
the Registrar of Companies, which is recei*.re’d_l”‘-Von
18.3.2003.
have resigned and also into cireumstai1Ces’,…li’t- is”‘Vstat1ed
The petitioner is only a Director ..
Rajaram Khandage who is thee-.Elxeoi1t._il\?e
Sadashiv Rao, the Chairman__l_l:of:_’th_e comiplanyiiare only
responsible for manage’ml:enAt’–of atheu of the Company
and sine-er-soother..pe’t§;rtioner’–._isll seeid.»”lto be only a honorary
Director;._in ‘lmy thyee-.plro__oeedings initiated against the
petitioner in”-aforesaid..Voas:es are required to be quashed.
_.;ACcordingly_,Vl’the Criminal Petitions are allowed. The
pdrooeed_iings._4″ainitiated against the petitioner in
725,004 (PCR No.l26/2004), before the JMFC,
eVs1rei”,i’ e.ee.i\:o.4o2/2004 (PCR No.908/2003) before the
l l::elNH<'=Cu-I\l'lll Court, Belgaurn and C.C.No.437/200'7(PCR
(J/'-
No.1l30/2004), before JMFC III Court, Belgaurn are
quashed.
However there is libertywto th’e””‘ ‘~rle:spOn’de11t–“”
complainant to proceed against the persons ‘avl1o”ar’e.3f:I1}~
charge and who are responsible for .the..veond1.1ot of
business, i.e., Chairman and Further,
in all these cases dispose of the
matter pending are imcharge of
affairs of the Si};
Sd/-4»
Iudgé
Vrp/- 1. — ..