Sri. K. Narayana Bhat vs Arun Kumar Bhat on 9 March, 2020

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. K. Narayana Bhat vs Arun Kumar Bhat on 9 March, 2020

Bench: John Michael Cunha

                              1


   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA

         CRIMINAL PETITION No.666 OF 2017

BETWEEN:

Sri. K. Narayana Bhat,
Aged 65 years,
S/o. late Keshava Bhat,
R/at 2-544, "Nandeesha",
Kombettu, Puttur - 574 201,
Dakshina Kannada.                                ...Petitioner

(By Sri. Aruna Shyam M., Advocate)

AND:

Arun Kumar Bhat,
Aged about 53 years,
S/o. late Ananth Bhat,
R/at D-4, Dukes Manor,
Matadakani Road,
Mangaluru - 575 006.                           ...Respondent

(By Sri. S. Vishwajith Shetty, Advocate)

      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. praying to quash the order dated 23.06.2014 passed
by the learned Prl. Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru in
Crl.Misc.No.34/2013       thereby       transferring      the
C.C.No.228/2011 which was pending before Prl. Civil Judge
and JMFC, Puttur, to the Court of II Additional Chief Judicial
                              2


Magistrate, Mangaluru, with a direction to try the said case
simultaneously with C.C.No.4/2013 vide document No.1.

      This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this
day, the Court made the following:

                          ORDER

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, D.K., Mangaluru, whereby CC No.228/2011 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Puttur, is directed to be transferred to the Court of the II Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangaluru, for trial along with C.C.No.4/2013.

3. C.C.No.228/2011 was filed by the petitioner herein under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. C.C.No.4/2013 was filed by the respondent under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468 r/w 34 of IPC. Respondent sought transfer of the said petition on the ground that case and counter case has to be tried together. The Sessions Court considering the amended provision of Section 142A of the 3 N.I. Act and in exercise of the discretion under Section 408 of Cr.P.C. has passed the impugned order. The same does not suffer from any error of law or fact warranting interference by this Court. This Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot substitute its own discretion in place of discretion exercised by the trial Court.

4. In that view of the matter, I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the impugned order. Consequently, petition is dismissed.

5. However, as it is submitted that the petitioner herein is a senior citizen and by virtue of the impugned order he has to travel from Puttur to Mangaluru, trial Court is directed to take up the matter on day to day basis and complete the trial as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of two months from the date of communication of this order.

Sd/-

JUDGE SV

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court