Karnataka High Court
Vithoba Mukund Naik vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 March, 2022
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
CRL.P No. 100429 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100429 OF 2019 (482-)
BETWEEN:
1. VITHOBA MUKUND NAIK
AGE 60 YEARS,
OCC: TAILER,
R/O: SHIRWAD,
TQ AND DIST: KARWAR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S V YAJI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENT
VN
BADIGER
(BY SRI. RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT)
Digitally signed
by V N BADIGER
Date: 2022.04.17
14:55:23 +0530
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
PRL. CJM, KARWAR TAKING THE COGNIZANCE IN C.C.NO.65/2013
DATED 29.01.2013 AND CHARGE FRAMED BY THE PRL. JMFC COURT,
IN C.C.NO.409/2013 DATED 23.06.2016 BE SET ASIDE OR QUASHED
-2-
CRL.P No. 100429 of 2019
AND CONSEQUENTLY THE PETITIONER WHO IS THE ACCUSED BE
DISCHARGED.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWIONG:
ORDER
1. The learned Magistrate by exercising power under Section 190(C) of Cr.P.C. has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC alleging that the petitioner has tendered false evidence by stating that he is an eye witness to the incident. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that learned Magistrate can take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC only at the time of delivering of any judgment or final order and cannot take cognizance of the said offence at the stage when the evidence of parties is recorded. He further submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is contrary to Section 344 of Cr.P.C.
-3-CRL.P No. 100429 of 2019
3.On the other hand, learned HCGP appearing for the respondent-State submits that petitioner having tendered false evidence, the learned Magistrate rightly taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC against the petitioner.
4.I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for parties.
5.The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC alleging that the petitioner had tendered false evidence in the proceedings pending before him, however, Section 344 of Cr.P.C specifies that learned Magistrate can take cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 193 of IPC only at the time of delivering of any judgment or final order and cannot take cognizance at the stage of the trial. Hence, the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate at the stage of the trial of the case is one without authority of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: -4- CRL.P No. 100429 of 2019
ORDER
i) The criminal petition is allowed.
ii) The impugned proceedings in CC.No.65/2013 pending on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC-II Court, Karwar is hereby quashed.
iii) Liberty is reserved to the learned Magistrate to pass appropriate order at the stage of passing final judgment or order.
Sd/-
JUDGE VB