Karnataka High Court
Sri Basappa vs State Of Karnataka on 2 April, 2013
Author: Anand Byrareddy
Bench: Anand Byrareddy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 7202 of 2012
BETWEEN:
Sri. Basappa,
Son of Thippaiah,
Aged about 52 years,
President,
Sri. Marikamba Sc/St Educational
Society (R),
Resident of Kamandalagondi village,
Jagalore Taluk,
Davanagere District - 577 701. ...PETITIONER
(By Shri. N.M. Shivanagoudar, Advocate)
AND:
1. State of Karnataka,
Jagalore Police,
Davanagere - 577 701,
Represented by
Special Prosecutor.
2. Gowdara Sannarudrappa,
Son of Byanna,
2
Aged about 56 years,
Resident of Mallur Hatti,
Gowdagere Post,
Challakere Taluk,
Chitradurga District - 577 786. ...RESPONDENTS
*****
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire
proceedings in C.C.No. 55/2012 (PCR No.30/2011) on the file
of the Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jagalore.
This petition is coming on for Admission this day, the
court made the following:
ORDER
The petitioner is said to be the President of an Education Society. It is alleged that the petitioner along with the Secretary who is no more, are said to have collected donations from students and their parents and have opened a Bank Account in the name of the Society and have misappropriated the amount deposited in that account. It is on the basis of the said complaint that the Magistrate is said to have taken cognizance and issued process. The petitioner having been 3 summoned, he is before this Court questioning the very maintainability of the complaint. Firstly, it is urged that the Magistrate has apparently not taken cognizance in the first instance before deciding to record the sworn statement or to issue process against the present petitioners. Secondly, even if all the allegations in the complaint are left uncontroverted, no case would be made out against the petitioners. Therefore, it is an ideally fit case which ought to be quashed under the provisions of Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr.P.C.' for brevity).
2. Firstly, the contention that the court has not taken cognizance may not be correct, for it is noticed from the order- sheet that the court has directed the case to be registered as PCR which would prima facie indicate that the court has taken cognizance. The expression 'taking cognizance', is not defined under the Code. It would only mean, from a catena of decided cases, that the court becomes judicially aware of the facts in 4 order to take further steps towards investigation and enquiry and this aspect is evident from the record that the court has addressed the complaint. Secondly, the contention that if all the allegations in the complaint go uncontroverted, no case would be made out against the petitioner, is an incorrect statement. If all the allegations go uncontroverted, the petitioners would land behind bars and therefore, the contentions cannot be accepted. The petition is rejected.
Sd/-
JUDGE KS