- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13771 CRL.P No. 9242 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9242 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SMT. VEENA, W/O JANARDHAN D.V., AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.325, GOOLAPPA GOWDA LAYOUT, H.A. FARM POST, DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 024. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, AMRUTHAHALLY POLICE STATION, SANOUGEGHALLI SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU CITY. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SRI. RAGHU M., AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O MARISWAMY @ MARIYAPPA, R/AT NO.216/2, 10TH CROSS, F-BLOCK, SAHAKARANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 092. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI.YUKTHA N., ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13771 CRL.P No. 9242 of 2024 THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS OF C.C.NO.416/2024 (CR.NO.281/2023) OF AMRUTHAHALLI P.S. FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 420 AND 34 IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HONOURABLE XLI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, Accused No.2, who has been charge- sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC read with Section 34 of the IPC, is before this Court seeking relief. 2. The prosecution alleges that Accused Nos.1 and 2, who are the owners of the subject land, entered into a registered agreement of sale dated 11.05.2020 with CWs.1 and 4 for a total sale consideration of Rs.75,00,000/-, out of which a sum of Rs.55,00,000/- was paid as advance sale consideration. After receiving the advance sale consideration, Accused Nos.1 and 2 sold the said land to a third party. When CWs.1 and 4 demanded repayment of the advance sale consideration, Accused Nos.1 and 2 executed a registered cancellation deed of the agreement of sale, under which the complainants received a sum of Rs.55,00,000/-. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13771 CRL.P No. 9242 of 2024 3. When the complainant insisted that Accused Nos.1 and 2 compensate them for having utilized the advance sale consideration of Rs.55,00,000/-, Accused No.1 issued a demand draft for a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- in favor of CWs.5 and 6. When the demand draft issued by Accused No.1 was presented for realization, the bank issued an endorsement stating “stop payment.” 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Accused No.2 is before this Court, and the demand draft for a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-, allegedly towards compensation, was issued by Accused No.1 in favor of CWs.5 and 6. The stop payment was allegedly issued by Accused No.1 and not by Accused No.2. 6. There is no reference in the registered cancellation deed of the agreement of sale indicating that Accused Nos.1 and 2 issued the demand draft in favor of CWs.5 and 6 as compensation to CWs.1 and 4 for allegedly utilizing an amount of Rs.55,00,000/- for a period of three years. 7. Furthermore, there is no allegation, nor any material to substantiate, that Accused No.2 induced the complainant to enter into a registered deed of cancellation of the agreement of sale with an intention to deceive. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13771 CRL.P No. 9242 of 2024 8. The non-payment of compensation, in the absence of any essential elements required to constitute the commission of an offence under Section 420 of the IPC, cannot be held against Accused No.2. Admittedly, the demand draft was issued by Accused No.1, and the stop payment was made by Accused No.1. 9. Therefore, in the absence of any allegation satisfying the essential elements necessary to constitute the commission of an offence under Section 420 of the IPC, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against Accused No.2 would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 10. Accordingly, I pass the following order. ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.416/2024 on the file of XLI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru, insofar as it relates to accused No.2 is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE GH, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6