Karnataka HC Quashes Prosecution Of Man Accused Of Creating GPA To Sell Bengaluru Site, As Police Never Collected The Document.

The petitioner challenged the order taking cognizance and issuing summons against him as accused No. 2 in C.C. No. 59598/2018.

The allegation was that he had participated in creating a general power of attorney (GPA) and that the document was used to sell sites.

The petitioner contended that he had already sold Sites Nos. 14 and 15 to the complainant in 1985 and had not executed the alleged GPA concerning Site No. 14.

The State’s counsel acknowledged that the investigating officer had not collected the alleged GPA during the investigation.

The petitioner also relied on the complainant’s civil suit, in which the pleadings referred to sales through a GPA holder but did not produce a GPA executed by the petitioner.

The Court considered its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, invoked to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

It relied on State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, para. 102, referring to the principle that criminal proceedings may be quashed where the record discloses no material supporting prosecution or where the proceedings amount to an abuse of process.

The petition’s heading also refers to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, but the Court’s reasoning and order invoke Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The Court treated the absence of the alleged GPA as central: the investigation had not secured the document said to have been created by the petitioner, and the State’s counsel confirmed that it was not collected.

The Court also noted that the complainant’s civil-suit pleadings and the material produced there did not include a GPA executed by the petitioner.

On that record, it found no prima facie material linking the petitioner to the alleged document and considered that continuation of the prosecution would be unwarranted; the related civil dispute was noted as additional context.

It allowed the petition and quashed the order dated 11 December 2018 taking cognizance and issuing summons in C.C. No. 59598/2018, only insofar as it concerned the petitioner, accused No. 2.