- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23811 WP No. 18729 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 18729 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LEELAVATHI K., W/O JAGADESH R., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT, NO.03, NAGARJUNA BUILDING, 3RD CROSS, NEAR KULLAPPA CIRCLE, NO. 244, TCH COLLEGE ROAD, NAGAWARA POST, BANGALORE – 560 084. 2. ARBIN TAJ AYUB, D/O AYUB, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/A NO. BUILDING NO. 11/4, SUVARNA BHAVANA, QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 052. ALSO AT, 17, PATIO.T-3, MARIYAM APARTMENTS, CLINE ROAD C, BANGALORE – 560 005 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. TAHIR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY HALASUR PS REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, OFFICE AT HIGH COURT COMPLEX, OPP. TO VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560 001. Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23811 WP No. 18729 of 2025 2. DILIP KUMAR S/O LATE. DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT LADHAI JEWELLERY, SHOP HOUSE NO.01, SADASHIVA, MODALIY, A ROAD, HALASURU, BENGALURU – 560 008 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R1; R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 13.12.2024 PRESENT AT ANNEXURE-C WHICH IS REGISTERED AS C.C.NO.50348/2025 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 254/2023 U/S 380, 411, 413 R/W 34 OF IPC FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 HALASURU POLICE AND THE SAME IS PENDING ON THE FILES OF HON’BLE X ACJM, MAYOHALL, BENGALURU CITY WHEREIN THE PETITIONERS ARE ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO. 2 AND 3 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioners seek quashing of the charge sheet dated 13.12.2024 and the cognizance order dated 09.01.2025 passed in C.C.No.50348/2025 arising out of Crime No.254/2023 by the respondent No.1 - police pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru City. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23811 WP No. 18729 of 2025 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. For the order proposed, notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioners viz., Leelavathi K. and Arbin Taj Ayub, were arraigned as accused Nos.2 and 3 along with the other accused persons in C.C.No.50348/2025 arising out of Crime No.254/2023 dated 08.09.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 380, 411, 413 read with 34 of IPC and the petitioners are shown to be the Directors of M/s.Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore. In this context, it is relevant to state that the petitioners had resigned from the status / position of a Director from the aforesaid M/s. Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd., as can be seen from Form No.DIR-12 issued by the Registrar of Companies. 4. Under identical circumstances, the said fact has been recognised and confirmed by this Court in the case of P.S.Ayub @ Bommanahalli Babu Vs. State of Channamanakere Acchukatte Police Station and Another - W.P.No.19063/2021 dated 09.06.2022, in which, this Court quashed the proceedings - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23811 WP No. 18729 of 2025 impugned therein as against the petitioner therein on the ground that he had resigned from the company on 01.01.2016 itself, much prior to the alleged commission of the offence and that no proceedings can be initiated or prosecuted against the resigned Director. 5. In P.S.Ayub’s case supra, this Court held as under: "In this petition, the first information report was lodged alleging that the gold jewelleries belonging to the complainant were stolen by the accused and the said accused sold the same to the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd in various branches. 2. The Police registered the FIR in Crime No.138/2020 and after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner alleging that he is the Director of the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd and as such has committed an offence punishable under Sections 380 and 342 read with Section 34 of IPC. Taking exception to the same this petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company on 01.01.2016 which is evident from Form No.DIR-11 issued by the Registrar of Companies. Hence he submits that the alleged incident has taken place after the petitioner ceased to be Director of the said company and as such the FIR registered against the petitioner is impermissible. 4. Learned HCGP submits that the petitioner being the Director of the company has received stolen property from the accused and as such has committed the offence alleged against him and at this stage, the FIR registered against the petitioner and the charge sheet submitted against the petitioner does not warrant any interference and sought for dismissal of the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23811 WP No. 18729 of 2025 5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 6. To substantiate the claim that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd. to which the stolen property was sold, Form No.DIR-11 issued by the Registrar of Companies is produced. The said document indicates that the petitioner/accused ceased to be the Director of the company with effect from 01.01.2016. The alleged incident has taken place after the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company in question which is alleged to have received the stolen property. 7. The resignation of the petitioner as Director of the Attica Gold Pvt. Ltd. is evident from Form No.DIR-11. The same has remained uncontroverted and not disputed by the respondents. In the absence of any dispute to the said document, it is implied that the petitioner ceased to be the Director of the company in question as on the date of the alleged incident. Hence, in the absence of any corroborative material that the petitioner as director of the company in question has received the stolen property, the registration of FIR and also the filing of charge sheet is without any substance. 8. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The Writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.138/2020 is quashed. iii) Liberty is reserved with the respondent State to proceed against the company which is alleged to have received the stolen property in accordance with law, if so advised." 6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the undisputed fact that under identical circumstances, this Court - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23811 WP No. 18729 of 2025 quashed the proceedings on the ground that the petitioners have resigned from the post of a Director, continuation of the proceedings insofar as the petitioners are concerned would tantamount to an abuse of the process of law warranting interference by this Court. 7. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.50348/2025 arising out of Crime No.254/2023 by the respondent No.1 - police pending on the file of the X Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru City, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 83