Karnataka High Court
Sri. Sanjay vs The State Of Karnataka on 12 April, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
CRL.P No. 100344 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100344 OF 2022 (482-)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SANJAY, S/O. BHARAMU AIDAMALE ALIAS IDAMALE,
AGE. 35 OCC. AGRICULTURE
R/O. BORGAON, 591216, TQ. NIPPANI
DIST. BELAGAVI
2. SRI. UTTAM S/O. RAVSAHEB PATIL
AGE. 42 OCC. AGRICULTURE/ INDUSTRIALIST
R/O. BORGAON, 591216, TQ. NIPPANI
DIST. BELAGAVI
3. SRI. RAMESH S/O. VIJAY VASKAR
AGE. 38, OCC. AGRICULTURE
R/O. BORGAON, 591216
TQ. NIPPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI
4. SHRI. BAHUSAHEB S/O. KERABA MAHAJAN
AGE. 43 OCC. AGRICULTURE
R/O. BORGAON, 591216
TQ. NIPPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI
5. SRI. BALASAHEB /ANNAPPA
S/O. RAMU DHONGE
AGE. 55, OCC. AGRICULTURE
R/O. BORGAON, 591216
TQ. NIPPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI
6. SRI. ULLAS S/O. MARUTI NIKKAM
AGE. 39 OCC. AGRICULTURE
R/O. BORGAON, 591216
TQ. NIPPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI
...PETITIONERS
-2-
CRL.P No. 100344 of 2022
(BY SRI. NEELENDRA.D.GUNDE.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH SADALAGA POLICE STATION
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD-580001
2. MAHADEV GANAPATHI KAROSHI
AGE. 57 OCC. KSRTC BUS CONTROLLER
R/O. KAROSHI, NOW AT BORAGAON
TQ. CHIKODI-591216
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R1,
SRI SHIVAKUMAR BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.,
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 26.04.2021 PASSED
BY THE 1 ST ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKODI IN
CRIME NO.140/2020 AND CC NO.553/2021 THEREBY TAKING
COGNIZANCE FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 143, 147,
341, 353, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND ISSUING SUMMONS, AS
AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
A charge sheet is filed alleging that on 29.12.2020, the petitioners - accused by forming an unlawful assembly forced the drivers of the bus belonging to the KSRTC to enter the bus stand, which was yet to be inaugurated.
-3-CRL.P No. 100344 of 2022
2. The learned Magistrate took the cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 353, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC and issued summons to the petitioners. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners - accused submits that the allegations made in the FIR as well as in the charge sheet do not disclose the commission of offences alleged against the petitioners. Hence, he submits that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate and the charge sheet filed by the police against the petitioners is without any substance.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent submits that the petitioners -accused by forcing the drivers of the KSRTC bus to enter to the bus stand, which was yet to be inaugurated have committed the offences alleged against them.
5. The learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No.1 - State would reiterate the submission of the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. -4- CRL.P No. 100344 of 2022
6. I have examined the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.
7. To constitute the offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC, there must be criminal force to deter public servant from discharging of his duty. In the present case, there is no material placed along with the charge sheet against the petitioners for having used criminal force to deter public servant from discharging his duties. In the absence of any statement of complainant's witnesses that the petitioners - accused used criminal force so as to pressurize the drivers of the bus to enter the bus stand, the filing of charge sheet against the petitioners under Sections 353 of IPC is not sustainable.
8. To constitute the offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC, the intentional insult must be of such degree provoking breach of public peace or commission of any other offence. In the present case, there is no allegation because of abusive language used by the petitioners, there was breach of public peace or commission of any other offence. Hence, the charge sheet filed against the petitioners for the -5- CRL.P No. 100344 of 2022 aforesaid offences in the absence of any corroborative material is without any substance. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) Criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned proceeding in CC No.553/2021 pending on the file of the 1st Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkodi, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE bkm