Karnataka High Court
Vasant Kadappa Gudodagi vs Srinivasan J on 6 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6 T H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1343/2022
BETWEEN:
VASANT KADAPPA GUDODAGI
S/O LATE KADAPPA GUDODAGI
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS
R/AT F-324, NO.45/5
NANDIDURGA ROAD
JAYAMAHAL
BENGALURU - 560 046 ...APPELLANT
(PARTY IN PERSON)
AND:
SRINIVASAN J
S/O LATE V. JAYARAM
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
NO.49, 15 T H CROSS ROAD
ESHWARA LAYOUT
INDIRA NAGAR, 2 N D STAGE
BENGALURU - 560 008 ...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.THANUJA M.V., ADVOCATE)
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
341 OF THE CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 08.02.2021 AS PER ANNEXURE-W
(ORDER SHEET DATED 08.02.2021) PASSED BY THE
LEARNED TRIAL COURT IN THE CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS
CASE IN I.A.NO.21 IN O.S.NO.10344/2006
DISMISSING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED
:: 2 ::
U/S 340 OF CR.P.C. AS BEING ARBITRARY AND
ILLEGAL AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed under section 341 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 8.2.2021 passed by the court below on the application filed under section 340 Cr.P.C. in O.S.No.10344/2006 on the file of XXX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
2. Heard Sri. Vasant Kadappa Gudodagi, the appellant and Smt. Tanuja M.V., counsel for the respondent.
3. The appellant is the defendant in the suit filed by the respondent for permanent injunction in respect of the property bearing No.19, HA Sanitary Board Khata No.180/1, BMP Sub-Division No.83-W, situated at Byrasandra, K.R.Puram, Bengaluru-560
036. In the course of proceedings, the appellant :: 3 ::
made an application under section 340 Cr.P.C. requesting the court to take action against the respondent for the offences punishable under sections 193, 196, 198, 199, 200, 209, 463 and 471 IPC. He filed this application because according to him the respondent's pleading to the effect that he is the absolute owner of the suit property and that the documents he has produced before the court are all false and fabricated, and therefore offences in relation to proceedings in the suit are committed. The trial court dismissed this application making two observations, firstly that it is a civil court and matter to be considered in the suit is limited to the issues framed; and secondly that for initiating enquiry into the allegations made in the application about offences under sections 193,196, 198, 199, 200, 209, 463 and 471 IPC, enquiry was necessary. It is also pertinent to note here that the appellant lodged an FIR with the police for the offences under sections :: 4 ::
120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 r/w section 34 IPC and the police filed charge sheet.
4. So far as the first observation of the court is concerned, the meaning to be gathered is that perhaps the court may be of the opinion that a civil court cannot entertain an application under section 340 Cr.P.C. It is incorrect, because what section 340 Cr.P.C. envisages is that any court can take an action if the offence is committed in or in relation to a proceeding in the court or in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding before the court. To understand the scope of section 340 Cr.P.C., section 195(3) must be referred, for section 340 Cr.P.C. deals with procedure to be followed in connection with any offence referred to in clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of section 195 Cr.P.C. Therefore court means Civil, Revenue or Criminal Court and includes a tribunal constituted by or under a Central Provincial or State Act if declared by that Act to be :: 5 ::
a court for the purpose of that section. In this view the court below has the jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 340 Cr.P.C.
5. So far as the second observation of the court is concerned, it has to be stated its opinion that an enquiry is to be held is correct, but having held so, it should not have dismissed the application. The course open was to decide the application along with the merits of the suit.
While discussing evidence, it is possible for the court to arrive at a conclusion whether any offence in relation to a proceeding in a court has been committed or not. In this view this appeal deserves to be allowed. Hence the following:
ORDER Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 8.2.2021 on the application filed under section 340 Cr.P.C. is set aside. The trial court is directed to decide the application under section 340 Cr.P.C.
along with the merits of the suit.
:: 6 ::
The respondent/plaintiff is hereby granted liberty to file statement of objections to the application under section 340 Cr.P.C.
Sd/-
JUDGE sd