IN THE HIGH COURT 01:' KARNA'I'AI{xA__' : if:
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA'-«U: "
DATE}: THIS THE 218? E)3'sY"G~F. V
BEFQR-r_~§g A 'H V
THE HON'BLE MR'.§:§isfrIcE"N,AN51§§1ég "
CRIMINAL f'E'FFFIQhgVu§a'e.3fi5 sigma
BETWEEN: % f A'
Mohamad AyyubKhanj" jjj V
S] o. Mohom,m§:<':..1srnai}l; I{har.r;
R/0. Multan: Bidair» _ 3 V "
District: Bi-tiar-,.'*--. " A
. . . Petitioner
(By
AND:
_ 1. ,. State
"IE-"p. By Prosecutor
S,'-.9. Khajasab
E'/oi. Noorkhan Taleem
A. , *' Bidar, District: Bidar. ...Rcspondcnts
T%&¢3y% S;-.1 Sharanabasappa Bab-shctty, HCGP for R1; Sn'
" K.;M.Nataraj, Advocate for R2)
This petition is filed under section 482 ,"
to quash entire criminal pmceedings regisfcredu b§f=Matke.t_&
Police Station, Bidar, in Crime No. _
This petition coming on for iiae
Court made the following:~ j
This petition is tof1ie.eo1:t1f31e1int";*egiste1ed
in Crime No. 194/2<x$7;$ of Bidar. The
ccmplaint wags petitioner,
alleging ofi:v.'3:t3.:é_:-,__;'=. 468, 471 and
420 ; 4 V '
'It: eoxnplaint are as follows: -
The LHV4-1esegVjo_£a4V;Ai1;i1iA::_".?iiras the owner of land bearm' g
stxvgvaeyv extent of 4 acres, situate at Nauhad,
~ Out of this, the Karnataka Industrial Areas
(for short, 'KIADB') igued notification in
the4'yea3% 193:() for acquisition of 3 acres of land in said survey
V nmpbef'; After acquisition of 3 acres of land, compensation
to ibnespondcnt. After excluding said land, an
of 33 guntas in survey No.47/A Ieznained with II-
N. c.-.sQV'*'/""""f'*
respondent. The name of II--n=:spondent was '
record of rights in respect of survcy…NQf47f ” ”
approached II–rcspo:1dcnt and Tip
purchase the land. The Ii~ms;5_o’n_c}cnt” *
for a sum of Rs.2,25,(‘){}0/–. Jtgtne 1998,
petifioner brought 3. ‘A ‘O;1 verification, ii-
nespondcnt found the land to an
extent of 2 was the owner
of 33 ‘tp”‘§xecute registcmd sale
deed. ‘gas insisting II-respondent
to cxe<;;i1t;_:"aM in respect of 2 acres 20
_Ho€§?ev£:r,'VI.v§-xré'sp5z.:1dent refused to execute registered
. V. – 2 acres 20 glmtas of land.
V petitioner once again approached II–
msponqgenfi .7ai1d insisted him to execute Icgistered sale deed
in of 2 acres 20 gtmtas and also assured him if there
mistake, he will be responsible ibr the same. With this
Vvfxnderstanding, II-responciem: executed registered saic deed
in favour of petitioner. Later, petitioner filed a complaint
M.
alleging II–rcspondc11t had cheated him. Ther§gfc>ifti:¢’_T’~V–IVI-
respondent filed the instant complaint for ~
3. This petition is filed u}:1d.{31;AA»Vs£éci.1Loi1_482 Cr,VP,C:;; {(3.
quash the complaint and Infdxrhafion
stage, avexments of ha§e«. on
their face value, withogxt ‘Aégdditipn “tie1e:5tio13.. On
consideration of avermérfig’ cif find averments
made therein _wO: u;1d ofiences alleged
against’;)eti.t;xi§3;1¢f;: as thc’.V;iis5pA?.1tr:’v of civil nature, it is for the
jufisdicfioaai’ ‘4Vi’a._§e5§_’ti.g§ate the same and submit a
report.
4′; 2 Ti1*31’fifo:;é,H\I”‘:io not find any masons to quash the
._ gag: First Information Report. Acconclingly, petition
is 351/.
Z A Judge
‘ Elvis”