-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 30*" DAY OF JULY, 2010
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE SUBHASH E zfifjl . '7 .
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1233/zoib"
BETWEEN:
Sri. Moharnmed Sajjad Sait
S/o Late. J.Abdu1 Rahman
Aged about 50 years
Residing at NO.139
IS' Floor, No.2
B.S.A.ROad 2
Bangalore E 560 005... _ _ ;...PE'I*mONER
(' A'dVS.)
State of Kariiataka bgrf' I ;
Cubbonpark POIICI: _Sta'r..iOiI_ " I
Baflgalorfi... " . '-
1-'i'Eepres'e}I£ea,'-byEublié I """ " 'V
V13~1f0Sۤ'C1.J,I.O1'I.V * -.
'Court Of xmafaka
Bangalcre Cit«";é%:_v» . __ " ...RESPONDENT
«(By ‘SI-I. Raja Subramanya Bhat, HCGP}
“‘iH_IS CRIMINAL PE’I’mON IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
cR.p.c_PRAYINO THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASEE ’10
QiJA;’3sH”TE{E PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1S’?70/2008 PENDING ON
P?ILE OF IV ACMM., BANGALORE AGAINST THE PE’I’mONER
I HEREIN WHO ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO.6.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
0 R D E R
Petitioner has called in question the proceedings in
c.c.No.is770/2008 on the file of IV Addl. Chief M;.tr§ptii:t.§in
Magistrate, Bangalore. C C
2. Case has been registered against’
others for an offence punishable underaffiections
420 r/w 34 of the IPC. In the said’jproceedingsV;iVthehnetitiloner it
also filed an application a’oi'”~Cr.§P.C. for
discharge from the proceediriggy C’
3. During :t1’17F:i.¥ course “,:inx;estigation,’ the documents
alleged to have .__r:efe’1*red’to the FSL. The FSL
has givenigreportfllthat»”the”-signattires at S.1 to 8.6 and the
signatures at ‘QiDi to means of imitation forgery. It
is opinedltliat, the .signatures are forged signatures. The entire
to cheating, criminal breach of trust and
forgé1Y£,. if
Considering the material on record and the experts
M if the” trial Court has found that, there is prima facie case
lproeeeld against the accused and accordingly has rejected the
V V V C :’_s’ai’d”applicati0n. %£
.3 it
-3-
5. Though the said order is not called in question, but the
order reveals the material colieeted by the prosecution against
the petitioner. Considering the same, not a case for inte1’fere.ne.e;v..
Petition dismissed.
sd/..e Igor; " IUoeE t ;"H =o=Ap/_