Karnataka High Court
Basavaraj Patil Gandal vs The State Through on 2 August, 2016
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2016
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL R.B.
CRIMINAL PETITION No.200914/2016
Between
Basavaraj Patil Gandal
S/o Sukumuneppa Patil
Age: 46 years,
Occ: Agriculture & BJP Taluka President
R/o Gandal Village,
Now residing at Shanti Nagar
Deodurga Tq. Deodurga
Dist. Raichur
...Petitioner
(By Sri Avinash A. Uploankar, Advocate)
AND:
The State through
Devudurga Police Station
Dist. Raichur
...Respondent
(By Sri P.S. Patil, HCGP )
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying to quash
the proceedings pending before the Court of Civil Judge
and JMFC at Devadurga in C.C. No.146/16 (Crime
No.35/16 of Devadurga P.S) against the petitioner.
2
This petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.146/2016 pending on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC, Devadurga.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case that complainant-Sri S.L.Manjunath, who was on flying squad for Deodurga Hobli, Deodurga, by-election of Legislative Assembly Election in his team one Sri Nisar Ahmed, ASI, Jalahalli Police Station, APC Sri Huligeppa 218 and car driver Pasha were there. On 31.01.2016 making allegation that there was a party meeting at Basaveshwara Kalyan Mantap arranged by Bharatiya Janata Party for their members in between 4 to 5 p.m., after the meeting Tiffin was also arranged in between 5 to 5.30 p.m. One Bhogappa videographer has made videography. It is also alleged that the petitioner has arranged the said function since he was the Bharatiya 3 Janata Party President of Deodurga Taluka, for which he committed violation of code of conduct and complainant gave a complaint against the petitioner for the above said offence. After investigation, Police have filed the charge sheet against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 171(H) and 188 of IPC. The same has been challenged in this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petition is in respect of registering the case against the petitioner for the alleged offences. It is his contention that as per Section 195 of Cr.P.C., the Court cannot take cognizance unless a public servant files a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C, therefore, registration of the case under Section 188 of IPC is illegal. He has submitted that before registering the case, the mandatory provisions of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. is not followed, no permission of the Magistrate has been obtained. Hence, the proceedings are not maintainable. He has further submitted that this matter is covered by the orders of this Court in the 4 similar nature of offences. He has also submitted that he has produced the copy of said orders. Hence, submitted to allow the petition and to quash the proceedings.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader has submitted that the matter has been covered by the orders of this Court. Therefore, this Court may proceed to pass the order as per the merits of the case and as per the orders passed by this Court, copies of which are produced by the petitioner.
5. I have perused the materials placed on record, so also the order dated 16.06.2015 passed by this Court in W.P.No.23611/2015. This Court by passing an order dated 16.06.2015, entertained the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., wherein also the alleged offences are under Section 78 and 79 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963, and under Section 188 of IPC. This Court after considering the merits involved in 5 the said case, ultimately allowed the writ petition and quashed the proceedings.
6. I have also perused the another order passed by this Court dated 13.04.2016 in Crl.P.No.201195/2015. The allegations made in the said case were also under Section 171(H) and Section 188 of IPC. This Court taking into consideration the materials placed on record and discussing the mandatory requirement of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C, so also Section 195 of Cr.P.C, held that without complying the mandatory provisions of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C, the case was registered, therefore, this Court proceeded to quash the proceedings in the said case also.
7. Looking to the case on hand, similar offences, as referred in the above orders, are registered as against the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the earlier orders passed by this Court in two cases, which are referred above and for consistency and uniformity, I am of the opinion that the case registered against the 6 petitioner is also not maintainable and it is not in accordance with law. Hence, petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.146/2016 (Crime No.35/2016 of Devadurga Police Station) pending on the file of Civil Judge & JMFC, Devadurga, are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSR