IN TI IL 111011 COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT D1IARWA[) DATED 11 lIST 1 IL 1 2 D:\Y OF OCTOBER 2() 11 B ELOR F 1i IF H0\ BEE MR. JUST ICE ANANI) BYRAREDDY CRIMINAL PETH1ON No.7995/20L0 I3IJWEEN: Veerappa Veeranna. So Ninappa Sonnad. :\ged about 58 ears, 0cc :Agrieulture curn Business, R/o Gajendragad. Ron Tal uk, District (iada. PIJillONI R (13\ Shri Karuna SAl. and Shri .A.S.Menasinakai, :\dvocates) AND: I State ot Karnataka. 13v its Public Prosecutor. I ugh Court of Karnataka. Circuit Bench, Dhar\vad. 2 [he Circle Inspector of Police. Ron [al uk. District Gada&. 3. The Sub Inspecto ot Police. a Gajendragad Town, Ron Taluk, District Gadag. 4. The Tabsildar, Ron Taluk. l)istrict Cladag. 5. The Special Tahsildar, Gajendragad. Ron Taluk. District Gadag. 6. The Revenue Inspector. Gajendragad. Ron Taluk. District Gadag. 7. The Village Accountant, Kulathgere Village. Ron Taluk. District Gadag. RESPONDENTS (By Shri. Vinayak S. Kulkarni. Government Pleader for respondsent Nos. 1 to 7) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash the complaint in Crime No.101/2010 and FIR No.204/2010 on the file of the Gajendragad Town Police Station in Ron Taluk. Gadag. District and all proceedings in Crime No.101/2010 on the file of the court ofthe judicial Magistrate First Class Ron. This petition coming on for orders this day. the Court made the following: I ORDER heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The present petitioner claims that he is in possession of the land bearing Survey No.23 measuring 2 acres 11 guntas of Purthugere Village, Ron Taluk. Gadag District and that he is in possession by virtue of an agreement of sale by the owner of the land. However, it is admitted that there is a dispute pending between the petitioner on the one hand and the State on the other and it was the subject matter of writ proceedings and culminated in Writ Appeal I 536t2007. whereby the petitioner was protected by an interim order of stay of dispossession and ultimately, the writ appeal was disposed o1 with a direction that the petitioner may avail of remedies available to him betbre an appropriate Civil Court. Accordingly, the petitioner claims that he has filed a civil suit and has also obtained an order of temporary injunction restraining his dispossession from the S 4 above said land. In the wake of these proceedings, a complaint to the effect that the petitioner is guilty of theft of material from the land of which he is in possession and it has been recognised in writ proceedings as well as before the civil court, is sought to he ignored in the proceedings being initiated, where the petitioner is alleged to have stolen material from his own property. According to the petitioner. the alleged material belonged to the petitioner and it was fencing material which was kept on the land by the petitioner. It is on a false and frivolous complaint of the respondents that criminal proceedings have been initiated and hence. the petitioner is beibre this court seeking quashing of the entire proceedings This court, in the first instance, has granted an interim order as prayed for and has thereafter admitted the petition. 3. The Counsel for the petitioner is now heard at length. 5 4. The learned Government Pleader would submit that in view of the interim order of stay granted in this proceeding, the further investigation in the case has been stalled and he would submit that even if the contentions of the petitioner are to he accepted, the petitioner is very well in a position to state the same before the trial court and seek discharge at the appropriate time and that investigation having been stalled. the State is at a disadvantage to place the complete material on record. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, by way of reply, would contend that the respondents admittedly have not produced any material in support of their case except the complaint and that this would be a case in point in favour of the petitioner. 6. Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, as rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, the petitioner may very well succeed before the trial court itself in seeking discharge if the material circumstances. as contended. 6 are available in favour of the petitioner. There is no impediment for the petitioner to place all such material before the trial court itself and seek discharge at the appropriate time. ilie petitioner is certainly vested jib a right of hearing beibre charge and the petitioner could then, on merits, seek a discharge at the appropriate time. Since the trial court would have the benefit of the record. if the investigation is permitted to continue and if it is completed and since the petitioner is protected from dispossession, admittedly; by virtue of an order of temporary injunction granted by a competent civil court, there is no apprehension on the part of the petitioner if the criminal proceedings are allowed to he taken up and if the petitioner is ultimately heard regarding discharge on merits at the appropriate time. Accordingly, without prejudice to the claim of the petitioner as to the complaint being without any basis, as the petitioner would not possibly have committed theft of material helongine, to the petitioner. which was in the land which is in the possession of the petitioner and if this can be established by reference to the material particulars. the trial court would address the same and an order in accordance \\ ith la\\ at the appropriate time. \\ith that observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd! JUDGE n \