Karnataka High Court
Balappa S/O : Gangappa Gavaroji vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 February, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CRICUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD E" 3
DATED THIS THE 10"' DAY OF FEBR|JA*R.Y:,'V.2O~iO'.V 1' 2
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.IusTIcE AR__A'LI Np-:;3}:--.;RAI .1':
CRIMINAL PETITIISN._ND,\7o9'2-/:VD1"0 1
BETWEEN:
1. Balappa v
S/o Gangappa G;a'var0j§
Age:
Occ: _Ag'ricu7!_t,.a.I;'re" Q V'
R/0 Mudhbie, _
Dvi_sTt.;VBéag%_é'ikt-;t_ ~ '
2. Gangappa I .
S/0 Baiaprla Ga.va"rQjI,_
Age: 44 year's,VO~:c:'~,Agricufture
R/c_I"r<a_vatagi-, _Tqi Jahkhandi
D_is2t,I IB'-.Vag@l|(Ot _____
(EN? --s"r';.;;S I I3 H:e.p"b afr;-.=,¥'Adv )
AND:
.1 --..AThefStaEte.I0f Karnataka
R'epreS'ented by the
- V-._State 'Public Prosecutor
Hig.h__CDurt Buildings, Dharwad
V";'(EN/Sri:P.H.G0tkhindi, HCGP)
.-------f.\f"f'--1---"s.
PETITIONERS
RESPONDENT
case against these petitioners in the said common
judgment, the learned Civil Judge (Sr.li)n.) did
his mind and did not state in his order that itis
in the interest of justice that an_eno_uiryjlshlouidéV'
into for the said offences and the:'r*.efo're;'lvregistraltion:'o~f.jtiié-e
said criminal miscel|aneou's._v'case pursuan't..V t'p_""twhe*': said-J
direction of the learned Ciyi.l..uV:Judge_ (Sr."Dn..__) pannot be
sustained in law.
4. Si*i'.'i5'g:.glf.¥;Go:t_kh§hd;i,"'vthe."»i.earned High Court
Government .con'<;e'cling that the learned
' Magistr'ate"wa's_v inregistering the said criminai
miscellaneous casej_fag'a.i__n'st4 these petitioners without there
being _vwritte~n V_coim'piai'ntVb\V/ the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.)
orv-':a.ja'l:ny_..gLofficer xof'"t'i1e Court of the learned Civii Judge
contends that the order passed by the
le'Ci.__'4r"nedV_.'CJi'¥..{iii:: Judge (Sr.Dn,) directing registration of
crimirsa,iA'case against these petitioners for the said offences
happily worded and therefore, the matter requires to
pie remanded with a direction to the learned Civii Judge
,s__.t.(HV"""""""
(Sr.Dn.) that proper compiaint in writing may be f_i.I_ed by
him or through any officer of his Court, in Compliaiiiffe-«_i?\r'iVi;h
the mandatory provision of Sections
Cr.P.C.
5. The order of the iearAnedj'Ci:vii'J_i,i'cigj'e"(iS'i-..:jn.;_)
passed in the said common'_i_u'dgnmentV. dated"2'1§j;2.,,20~O9 %irii--.ii'
sofaras it reiates to the d_irect_ion_ by? him" for
registration of a crimir:'a.i:i"case a_gai"r'e--st~ tiheyse petitioners for
the offences under Sectiohnjs 196yanad_ of IPC reads as
under:
34" «ease econ; mcseeoso cioca
aioaaré 0' emodocfln aajfiqdaofiomcfi
c~a$:::a§3r*3s%a*3a_.'.__'¢bs§fis$.:;:iiSoa52:':_'Eo'c3: 530:3 padre ease ease; eacead
a§,%J;>;§aa" esoee sea; moo cs eeoseq awed asaaaeaa
;A5;§aa:$e:3:,,,'/1' §§go33a Vflgeédeaaseqt meazeaaeoese cause 's2a.gd.ra
dsioohzdco ezficéaicaficfi "
u .6".-:_ Further, the impugned order dated 23.12.2009
V' pVass.ed by the learned Magistrate in Cr!.IViisc.No.12/2009
reads as under:
"Register the separate Criminal Misc_,___
case against E)eft.No.1 Baiappa Ganga_ppV_a.l4_:'i~.t_
Gouroji, R/0 Mudhol and D3 Ganappa~~--.5j[c§_"__i"'.j'av"
Balappa Goroji, R/o Kavatagi has for
Judgment dated 21.1i2...2nlo'9
No.324/2000 and 52/2o01.7.g' '
Hence for orders.__°=..
Issue notice to Re,s_oo'n_dents 1.'and_3,_.E
Call on 20/if/'201'D. V ~ %
4w
/2, " of the above orders passed
respectiveiyfloyVV't_he._v"le.alrned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and
lea'ri'a.ed__TV'l~1a_gistra'te,._..itVis clear that no complaint in writing
' duiy.sivg4ned4,l.«:eit_her by learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) himself
orédby officer of his Court duly authorised in that
beha!f,:"u_vaVs sent to the Court of learned Magistrate for
V' registering the criminal case against the present
ufigetitioners for the said offences.
wm_;;r'~y~\,,«
8. Section 340(1) cr.P.C. reads as under:
"S.340. Procedure in cases mentioned
Section 195 - (1) When, upon an appiicat-E.o_nV.'__'__i"ii
made to it in this behalf or otherwise;a.nA3!:"i""'d
Court is of opinion that it is»eVxpedientii'nfthe'
interest of justice that an :=i_nqL_:i-ryf? sh,o'u.ld"- bewj-st.,__
made into any offence referred---to=-in cla.use::(b) if
of sub--section (1) of"-S'ection =.1.9S.,gj*,w"hVich" it
appears to have beeUi..._c'¢'mm.i_tted' "i'n.._or_.~§in
reiation to a proce.ecing'._in;_tha"i:..Cou~rt or, as the
case may' be, intregspect of document
produced or givein in evid4e"n°c_e_ in is proceeding
in th§a«it"*vCo5ti_rt', "sucah"....'Co.ur9tVv may, after such
preliminafn-:".;__ingui--r$/j.' as it thinks
r:Vi'feces'sar3'., - f"
if V~._g4'(a) ' '=.re'cord"'a:_fi'n'ding to that effect;
(bjf 'enfiake a complaint thereof in
send it to a Magistrate of the first
class having jurisdiction;
(cl) take sufficient security for the
appearance of the accused before
such Magistrate, or if the alleged
offence is non--bai1ab|e and the
fir
Court thinks it necessary so to do,_..___
send the accused in custody
such Magistrate; and
(e) bind over any perf_son__to 9
and given evidence. yibeforey ' suich' A y_y
Magistrate. T.
9. Further, Section 195 :o'f~.CiuP.C. raeads under:
5.195. '4Pi*osec1JVff"§~.'Qi;1 .'fovi?XA.conVtempt of
lawful authority of"pub'lic offences
against justice foisoffexnces relating
to dccurn"ents:"give'ii':in"evyi--dVé--nce' -- (1) No Court
shautaxe¢agnaance«ti
',(aylfgy.~ xxx
(H) XXX
aaaaaa y (W) XXX
(b) (1) of any offence
punishable under any of the
following sections of the Indian
Penal Code (45 of 1860), namely,
sections 193 to 196 (both
inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211
(both inclusive) and 228, when
-}_'
9
been committed in, or in relation ._
to, any proceeding in any Court,
(ii) xxx
(iii) xxx ._
Except on the comp_|aint"i-n"writinggofthat V " it
Court by said office-.,r:."o.f the C_0ur.t
Court may__ authorise'rv._i_nwr__writi'n"g. __i'n Vghis
behalf or q--tVhle'r.._'t.,o'u,r_t to which
that Court is su-b_-orfdiniateg"-Cf", C
10. FVréjm«';>~a_, of the above
provisions '¢§_sécrjon"s'1_éi§.i_'b.:)"' (1) and 340(1) of Cr.P.C., it
is clear thaCtAv'C'Cwheh«.,a'n.y"'-Court is of opinion that it is
expedient~.._in rthe'»inte're:s't«--..ofEustice that an inquiry should
be made. into '-a,n_do"fferice.' referred to in Clause (b) of Sub
it:Sect'ionE""i:'1):"'of__195, which appears to have been committed
"inyin-.'ke,lg'ation~"to a proceeding in that Court or, as the
case. may' be', in respect of a document produced or given
evidence in a proceeding in that Court, such Court may,
._é"a_i"ter='A such preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks
C' wnecessary -
_,_r----~
10
(i) record a finding to that effect;
(ii) make a complaint thereof in writing;
(iii) send it to a Magistrate of the first
jurisdiction;
11. In the case of M.s'.'AI'iiawatg,..ys:'$taije"'=of'g
Haryana and another reported»200O).V_1fi"St§C which
is relied upon by the'learne'd""C'o:iii_§§el..for the petitioners,
while considering the 195 of cr.P.C.,
the Hon'bie isupi-g§:~me::'._ceurt at para Nos.5
and6as V . V
llll .. XI deals with "false
against public justice"
anci--tSectio'n_ occurring therein provides for
-puynishrnent for giving or fabricating false
6,-viderjce in'a"'j'udicial proceeding. Section 195
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)
where an act amounts to an
o_ffe.r.1ceA of contempt of the lawful authority of
"public servants or to an offence against public
it °'=.,_ju'stice such as giving false evidence under
Section 193 IPC etc. or to an offence relating
to documents actually used in a Court, private
r_§""""\..--
11
prosecutions are barred absolutely and only
the court in relation to which the offence
committed may initiate proceedis1:'g's:.,f"L:'«_:'"~.
Provisions of Section 195 Cr.P.'(_2}r"'ares-..:' 'V'
mandatory and no court has 3'urisd.i.ct'ioun::.t:o._
take cognizance of any"mof"'Athe. -offe'ric_es":"
mentioned therein unless tl'i<?te.'_'lis'lVa
in writing as requiredi'un.der thatV'sectiwo'n{»..j is
settled law that every..«_V'l'incorrect"_'"or false
statement doesnxot mla'¥<ecit Vincumbelnt 'upon
the court to (sic) to
exercise judicial _d--isc_rjetio-né to"o'i?_dVer1,p"rosecution
only in;'th'Ci,|:largeir interest of':--the..administration
OfjUiS'fla§\§-tir'""I' V '
A --. ' 5V.VCr.P.C. prescribes the
proceciyurle-._ a complaint may be
__preferre_dv.u'.nderV"Section 195 Cr.P.C. While
undesr SecL«io_n_..19S Cr.P.C. it is open to the
Courtyvlbefore which the offence was committed
t.r'5fp.vr'efer,.a complaint for the prosecution of the
offender, Section 340 Cr.P.C. prescribes the
S procedure as to how that complaint may be
preferred. Provisions under Section 195
Cr.P.C. are mandatory and no court can take
cognizance of offences referred to therein (sic).
("__(""Ha'\.-..._...,
It is in respect of such offences the court has__
jurisdiction to proceed under Section
Cr.P.C. and a complaint outside the
of Section 340 Cr.P.C. cannot be filed"-..l§.yv %
civil, revenue or criminal""'court', itsijb
inherent jurisdiction.
12. Further, in the CaiRS'e_xOf Amahzrilfaft Qtgareshi Vs
Union of India reportedin AIR .j1j"9«9_2,:S(: 1831, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, while c_onsi,derinfg th~e"p:rovVisions of Section
340 Cr.P.C. i1i'as'p.i5seriiredat para i»i'os--.«a:4 and 35 as under:
""" reference may be
:'made the Code of Criminal
i3A'r'o_ce<:lurev._itu:nder'«--._:'Ch.apter XXVI under the
_ .,head'if?9vV "Pi-'ovisio"ns as to certain offences
affectind"the._._administration of justice". This
_ _sectio'ri..,confers an inherent power on a Court
t.§:--,._.rnake,'.:a complaint in respect of an offence
' corntnitted in or in relation to a proceeding in
it .,t:hat.VCourt, or as the case may be, in respect of
' adocument produced or given in evidence in a
proceeding in that Court, if that Court is of
opinion that it is expedient in the interest of
justice that an enquiry should be made into an
,,...Wrvm----w-W
offence referred to in clause (b) of sub-section.'
(1) of Section 195 and authorises such
to hoid preliminary enquiry as it_.:":'th'inkjs:__j'4-
necessary and then make a compfa.int"_'t.her.eof
in writing after recording-"'a"findi_ng,to"ihat57
effect as contemplated un:'derf_'sub--sectio.n
of Section 340. The words "'i"n._o'r in rrelatjon_Hto_:§
a proceeding in that""'Co'urt" show"=that;E the
Court which can take Aa-c'tioh- under thissection
is only the Court"ope,ratirtg definition
of Section' 195(2). b:'e_fore..'V\;.hic':'hv,or:V~--'iin 'relation to
whose 'i3tQ:jCeed:ing .:'.the«. has been
comn'1'itted:... _of caution inbuilt
inthat'::proyis'io_yn" the action to be
'takenAshould'»ibe«vi,'_e;<.pedient in the interest of
justice. is incumbent that the
power, given by this Section 340 of the Code
S should beused with utmost care and after due
_ V.c'onsi'"d~e_ration. The scope of Section 340(1)
f_ _w-h_ich"ic.or'responds to Section 476(1) of the Ofd
é"*.t'Codej~: was examined by this Court in
l(..,'i'('a-rtlinakaran v. T.V.Eachara Warrier, (1978)
"1.,V_€3cc 18: (AIR 1978 sc 290) and in that
AT""~«.decision, it has observed (paras 21 and 26 of
" AIR):
"At an enquiry held by the Court unde.r.__
Section 340(1), Cr.P.C., irrespective of
result of the main case, the only questioii-.'.Vi's._:__'7:_.
whether a prima facie case is made out'-whic'r,l"
if unrebutted, may ha\.;e'»«.ay --'_reaS'ori.ablVev--.i'.»
likelihood to establish the si)ecifi'ed:'offen'ce"anij'~rc,l,,_'?.c_'
whether it is also expedyyient 'i'n_the of it
justice to take such actio~n:."'-i.
................. A "The
two Dre~c:onditions a re t'ha.t:_f aterials
produced_:be_fore"th'e iii-lion'./:'V'*€?oui't«~:make out a
prima4_Vfaciefca5eV:"foix. secondly
that ity interest of justice to
permit Section 193 IPC."
35.' provisions of Section
_340't:f theV'V--.codeV"of Criminal Procedure are
.~5;.allu'ded on'*:~,:.._fQF~the purpose of showing that
necessary care and caution are to be taken
itibeforetfinlitiating a criminal proceeding for
'°«perjury_ against the deponent of contradictory
staternents in a judicial proceeding.
--':13. Further, in the case of Amzad Ali Vs Marfat Ali
" -aiewas and Others reported in 1997 CrI.L.J. 4143 while
,,u._<"""'*~»-'
15
considering the provisions of section 340 C:-.P.c., the
Calcutta High court has observed at para Nos.32, 34
and 37 as under: V
32. Thus, upon a plain reading Sillvlbrvlll it
section (1) of Section 340 ofthe. éprese_nt"CodVe~.',".
of Criminal Procedure and cons:§'de.fatiiori"o:f'the'-~..
decisions cited above, it is fouridllthat the E;
well settled on the po'iv.riV:t"'-i.that. an 'o.r'cier'i,:Vfo'r'
lodging a complaint u--nd'er "'Section*~34.0§(1)
without expressly.."rec'o'rdii:jigg3uaayvi'finding to the
effect that it is iri'-.the_'jinterest of
justice rijiade into the
of'i'e'rice:':jcon'ceiined_'i's viti_'a'te'd and illegal being
breach"v'ojf-the'4'e--:t_p"i=ess provisions of Section
34'G.(_1i).. alndisf !:i4a"bl_e'"'to be set aside. The
_.Iearned._:'Co.urise'i appearing for the opposite
paglrties weVreva!.so frank enough to concede this
'- .. _ legal position.
A It is thus needless to comment that
"impugned order directing making of
coifiplaint and the consequent prosecution
fiibased on that order were per se illegal and are
liable to be quashed on that ground alone.
(,__§*-v-«-
16
34. When the impugned order is liable..__
to be set aside only by reason of the fact
it did not comply with the man_cia~tojry_'__j'
requirements of recording an express'f_i:ndiVng'i' ii
to the effect that it is expediientin the'Vi4n'terfe's't.A_'_j;.
of justice to make a compiaintfi'u.nder_'Section'-rr..__
3406), the question ywhethe'r*;or'--not mateirials
on record were sufficievnt"'w«to give._'rise'r_:to'athe
satisfaction of the Couirt.VV:b'elo"wgA regai'd.i.ng_n§the
existence of a priimai fiacie vvlca'sefiu*n_der Section
473. of 19C so ..to.v"__justi'fyV."lodging of a
comp|ai.nt*:does ri1A_ot§ce_:x'yi=| for"~a'_riy_dejcision by this
Court-and examine the
impug..ned find out whether or
ivnotvitifiriso fromuflthe infirmity in this
regard.'
dimpugned order which
c_oVnstitutexs"«.....t.h«e very foundation of the
ivmpyuglned prosecution against the petitioner
E.l.iegal and bad, it would be sheer abuse
of. 'process of the Court to allow the said
'order to stand or the prosecution to be
V " proceeded with. It cannot, therefore, be said
r_
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in order to prevent
the abuse of the process of the Court.
14.if the order of the iearned Civil Judge
and that of iearned JMFC impugned'herein"'avréefpa'refi§i:iiy'r-_
read in the iight of the observatiohs ofiiiVoni'bi_e
Court, High Court of CaIcuttaVim_g:a~dV_e the
to Supra, it could be seen tgh-a--tx:"i't--_ is.._not "stated,E by the
iearned Civil Jud9e(Sr.D"n)'in _'it is exivedient
in the I'fll'€I'E'5f'uOi¢ifiL%SffC{:?';' iisihiouid be made
into the offehcesg e;=iei;;Cons 196 and 208
of IPC (.wi"iic.hAV.Aar.e Section 195(1)(b)(1)
of Cr.p'.c)" "C been committed by the
petitioners"».tie.:eiri,._it't.h'e».::_".defendants in the said suits).
.-=._Thu_sf.,it:E_s eteai? ti'iea.1§._..thE.= learned Crvii Judge (Sr.Dn) did not
'recorci s.;j"thepV«E'm__pugned order, his finding to the effect that
itfiwas in the interest of justice that an enquiry
should. be rhade against these petitioners in respect of the
V' "..fl.sAaiici*-offences. It is further clear from the said order that no
cohfipiaint in writing was directed to be sent to the iearned
'__,,.§**-wv
I8
complaint in writing was directed to be sent to the learned
Magistrate for registering criminal case agajihst'~«_:'the
petitioners for the said offences.
15. Therefore, I am of thVe"considere_d' if
the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) vvas
stating in his impugned orde~r_,,:'th_at defendarit:N'o's;'1'and 3"'
therein (petitioners herein) _,a--pp.e:are~d,_ to h'av-e committed
the offences under Caectionsf',i9ti"a:rrd.'R08 of IPC and
therefore, thej;'ca_se provided under
Section 3&0 issued to both of
that, in his opinion, it
was eV$<'ped--ieVnt of justice that an enquiry
shoutd bea""m_:ade'.'--iritowlthe said offences. Further, the
leari{1ed'iw.Ci"v1l Judg'e""(Sr.Dn.) could have held a preliminary
regard before issuing direction for
reg4i'stra.tiori.,.oVf criminal case against the petitioners for the
said offences. Besides this, learned Civil Budge (Sr.Dn.)
have made a complaint in writing duly signed either
M by himself or by any officer of his Court duly authorised in
r
20
17. For the reasons aforesaid, I hold that the
registration of Criminai Misceiianeous No.12/20G9"5'y.Vg:th4e
iearned Magistrate pursuant to the order
Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) in his common
21.12.2009 passed in os Nos.32*d/200'0
his fife directing registration--.,o'F..V_theA'criminVaVI'-.:ca.s'e"'against"V
these petitioners for the offen--€é.5_:*.u'n~der .$e'ctv!.on.s§ 196 and
208 of IPC and aiso the.'sai_dV§'.--.drd.ei¥':_the learned Civil
Judge (Sr.[.V)r;:.;) in law.
Consequenti'y:?';_..__V --':7§i'i i iiwiproceedings in
the learned Magistrate
cannotnnbe 'continued. Hence, I pass the
f0|IowingE"e.___V _ V . i V
ORDER
petition fiied under Section 482 of H allowed. The impugned order dated 23.4'i2.200"9'i' passed in cr:.Misc.No.12/2009 by the learned F'ri;u.;iMFsC, Jamkhandi and ali further proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
fM Further, the impugned order in the common Judgment dated 21.12.2009 passed by the iearned'-i?5t-!.;":_ Civil Judge {Sr.Dn.), Jamkharidi in OS Nos.324,{:00V0:'tfaifid 152/2001 insofar as it relates to dv1re'<:ti--ng ifegji_%,treait;ae.{;:f crirninai case against the present °peti1t_§o'ners'--yiih.o defendants in the said suit for' t'h:é"~~QffenCe.s untiezr $_:eCt»ioris 196 and 208 of IPCés aisqset as'§'de';_'*-- _ JUDGE