Karnataka High Court
Mukkatira Anitha Machaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 August, 2013
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K. N. KESHAVANARAYANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.5934/2009
BETWEEN:
Mukkatira Anitha Machaiah,
Aged about 44 years,
D/o. Late Mukkatira Machaiah,
Residing at G- 1, No.27,
Hanumappa Reddy Layout,
Chelikere Main Road,
Kalyanagar Post,
Bangalore-560 043. ... Petitioner
(By Sri.M. T. Nanaiah &
M/s. Shankarappa & Associates, Advocates)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
By Virajpet Town Police,
Virajpet,
Kodagu Dsitrict.
2. V.G.Sainath,
S/o. B. D. Govinda Naik,
Aged 37 years,
Residing at Virajpet Town,
Virajpet,
Kodagu District. ... Respondents
(By Sri.K.Dilip Kumar, HCGP for R-1;
Respondent No.2 is Served)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C praying to quash all further proceedings in
C.C.No.462/2009 now pending on the file of the Principal
Civil Judge (Jr.Dvn) & JMFC., Virajpet, Kodagu District and
dismiss the complaint.
This Criminal Petition coming for admission on this day,
the Court made the following:
ORDER
Though respondent No.2 has been served with the notice of this petition, he has remained absent and unrepresented.
2) In this petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner has sought for quashing the prosecution launched against her in C.C. No.462/2009 on the file of J.M.F.C., Virajpet, Kodagu District, for the offence punishable under Section 507 IPC.
3) Respondent No.2 filed a report before the Station House Officer, Virajpet Police Station on 13.12.2008 alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 507 of IPC.
3
4) As, the offence alleged in the report was a non- cognizable offence, the Station House Officer submitted a requisition to the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking permission to investigate the case. On the basis of such requisition, the learned Magistrate granted permission to investigate the matter. Based on that, the case in Crime No.167/2008 came to be registered and after completing investigation, charge sheet came to be laid based on which cognizance was taken and summons was ordered to be issued. On coming to know of the same, the petitioner presented this petition inter alia contending that the procedure adopted by the Station House Officer in submitting a requisition to the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking permission to investigate the matter is without any authority of law and therefore, the permission granted by the jurisdictional Magistrate on such requisition is bad in law and contrary to the various decisions of this court. There is no dispute that the report submitted by the 2nd respondent prima facie indicated commission of non- cognizable offence under Section 507 of IPC. 4
5) Section 155 of Cr.P.C deals with the procedure to be adopted in respect of an information received by the officer in charge of a police station relating to commission of a non-cognizable offence. According to sub-section(1) of Section 155 of Cr.P.C., when an officer in charge of the Police Station receives an information as to the commission of a non-cognizable offence, he shall enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in the prescribed book and refer the informant to the Magistrate. According to sub-section (2) of Section 155 of Cr.P.C., no Police Officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. Thus, reading of sub-section (1) of Section 155 of Cr.P.C. makes it clear that the duty of the SHO, who receives information as to the commission of a non-cognizable offence is only to enter or cause to be entered the substance of the information in the prescribed book and refer the informant to the Magistrate. It is for the informant to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate and seek a direction to the police for investigation. If the 5 Magistrate on being approached by the informant, directs investigation, the Police Officer concerned would get jurisdiction to investigate the matter.
6) This Court in Anand Singh Vs. State of Karnataka disposed off on 22.10.2008 in Criminal Petition No.3082/2007 has held that under Section 155 of Cr.P.C., the police officer has no authority to approach the Magistrate with a requisition seeking permission to investigate. In the case on hand, as noticed supra, upon receipt of the report submitted by the 2nd respondent, the SHO of Virajpet Police Station registered the same as NCR and submitted a requisition to the jurisdictional Magistrate seeking permission to investigate the matter, based on which, the Magistrate granted permission. Thus, the procedure adopted by the SHO is without the authority of law and the same is not contemplated under Section 155 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the permission granted by the Magistrate on such requisition is also without any basis, as such, the investigation carried on by the police and the charge sheet 6 filed thereon are without the authority of law. Therefore, the prosecution launched against the petitioner is liable to be quashed. However, it is open to Respondent No.2 , who is the informant before the police to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate and seek necessary orders as contemplated under Section 155 of Cr.P.C.
7) In view of the above, the petition is allowed. The prosecution launched against the petitioner in C.C. No.462/2009 on the file of the JMFC, Virajpet, Kodagu District, is hereby quashed.
SD/-
JUDGE KGR*