IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARAWAD Dated the 20’ day of April 2011 :BEFORE: HONBL,E MR.JUSTICE : V.JAGANNATHAN CRiMINAL PETITION No. 10108 / 2011 BETWEEN: 1. Bujabali, Sb Tavanappa Rajamane. Age: 66 years, Consulting Engineer, Rio Adarsha Nagara, House No.76, 4th Cross, Hubli. 2. Brahrnagouda, Sb Annappa Gouda Patil, Retd. Officer, R/o Shivananda Nagara, House No.198, Navanagara. 3. Kerappa, Sb Manikyappa, Age: 78 years, Social Worker, Oathpet, Plot No.25, Gokula Road, Chaithanya Nagara, Hubli. 4. Mahaveera, Sb Nabiraj Gongadi, Age: 61 years, Business, Rio Mahaveeragalli, Cross No.1, Hubli. Petitioners (By Sri R.B.Contractor, Advocate.) AND: The State of Karnataka, Hubli Town Police, rept. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building Dhara act. Respondent (B Sri Anand K.Navalgimath. Ad ocate.) Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the order of the learned 1 JMFC-I Court, Hubli. issuing summons in C.C.No. 3813/2010 dated 2.12.2010 and to quash the entire proceedings in the said case against the petitioners. This petition coming on for hearing this day. the court made the following: ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Goiernment Pleader for the respondent- State in respect of the petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No. 3813 2010 on the file of the learned JMFC-I Court. Hubli. 2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that. in respect of a meeting held on 29.8.2010. according to the complainant. certain I persons including the present petitioners. ii crc giving trouble and were preventing holding of the meeting and, therefore. the complainant sought for protection by stating that. at any time. the persons named in the complaint may come to the premises and may create galata. Thereafter, the police registered a case on the basis of the said complaint dated 29.8.20 10 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147 and 447 read with 149 of the [P.C. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was also filed. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the complainant himself as withdrawn the complaint and this is clear from the letter dated 4.9.2010 given by the complainant to the C.P.I. of Shahara Police Station. Hubli. and in the face of such stand taken b the complainant, the question of continuing with the investigation and filing of the charge sheet. therefore, does not arise. When the complainant himself is not interested in pursuing the matter and has withdrawn the complaint on his own free volition, the 4 police authorities should have dropped the further proceedings. 4. In the light of the above submissions put forward and on a perusal of the complaint, which is in the nature of seeking protection and nothing more than that and also having regard to subsequent conduct on the part of the complaint by submitting the letter dated 4.9.2010 to the police, wherein he had sought for withdrawal of the complaint, on his own free volition, the police authorities could not have taken up the matter further by filing the charge sheet. When the complainant himself does not want the matter to go on further and withdraws his complaint, no purpose would be served in directing the petitioners to take the trial before the trial court and it would be a waste of time as well as a burden on the trial court. 5. For the aforementioned reasons. in the interest of justice. this petition requires to be allo ed arid accordingly. this petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No. 3813/2010 on the tile of the learned JMFC-I 0 0 CD C o 0 m CO bj ‘ r’ CD C0 a. a. ‘0 C C’. C S CD C, If