Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. Srikanth B V vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 June, 2017

Author: K.N.Phaneendra

Bench: K.N.Phaneendra

                            1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2017

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA

       CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3429 OF 2017

BETWEEN

1.    Sri. Srikanth B.V.
      S/o. Sri.H.Veeranna Gowda
      Age: 35 years, Occ: Agriculture
      Bekalle Village, Madur Taluk
      Mandya-571 425.

2.    Sri. B.M.Shankaregowda @ B.M.Shankar,
      S/o: Sri. M.Mangaiha,
      Age: 59 years, Occ: Agriculture,
      House No.18, Patelanakoppulu
      Madur Taluk, Mandya District
      Mandya-571 425.

3.    Sri.B.S.Harish
      S/o: Sri.B.M.Shankaregowda,
      Age: 23 years, Occ: Agriculture,
      House NO.18, Patelanakoppulu
      Madur Taluk, Mandya District
      Mandya-571 425.

4.    Sri.B.S.Girish
      S/o: Sri.B.M.Shankaregowda,
      Age: 32 years, Occ: Agriculture,
      House NO.18, Patelanakoppulu
      Madur Taluk, Mandya District
      Mandya-571 425.
                             2




5.    Sri.Chennegowda,
      S/o: Sri. Huchegowda
      Age: 50 years, Occ: Agriculture
      House No.26, Bekkalale
      Madur Taluk, Mandya District
      Mandya-571 425.

6.    Sri.Chethan.B.C.
      S/o: Sri. Chennegowda
      Age: 25 years, Occ: Agriculture
      House No.17, Bekkalale
      Madur Taluk, Mandya District
      Mandya-571 425.                   ...Petitioners

(By Sri.Ravindra Prasad B. Adv.,)

AND

1.    The State of Karnataka
      The Police Inspector
      Koppa Police Station
      Koppa, Mandya District-577 126
      Represented by
      State Public Prosecutor
      High Court Building
      Bangalore-560001

2.    Sri.Pandith Shankaregowda
      Salu Maragalu Thimakka Hasiruu
      Prashasthi-2015 Awarded
      Patelanakoppulu, Bekallale Post
      Koppa Hobli, Madur Taluk
      Mandya District
      Mandya-571 425.                 ...Respondents

(By Sri.S.Rachaiah, HCGP for Respondent No.1)
                             3




     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE
PROCEEDINGS ON PRINCIPAL ADDITIONAL CIVIL
JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. MADDUR IN C.C.NO.1154/2016
AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT (CRIME) FIR
NO.54/2015 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1
PETITIONERS P/U/S 143, 454, 427, 436, R/W 149 OF
IPC AND ETC.,

    THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:

                       ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.

2. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of the criminal case in C.C.No.1154/2016 arising out of Crime No.54/2015 pending on the file of Principal Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Maddur.

3. On careful perusal of the entire material on record, there are certain allegations made against the petitioners specifically mentioning the overt act with reference to the offences punishable under Section 143, 454, 427, 436, read with Section-149 OF IPC. 4

4. Police after thorough investigation, have submitted the charge sheet. The learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court the report submitted by the Branch Officer attached to the office of the Executive Engineer, Electricity department, Koppa, where in some suspicion is expressed by said officer with regard to the fire mischief by the electricity short circuit. However, the other material produced before the Court shows there are eye-witnesses to the incident and the police have thoroughly drawn up mahazar. At this stage no inference can be drawn with regard to the guilt or otherwise of the accused. When some materials are available, the Court cannot quash the proceedings under Section-482 of Cr.P.C. The liberty is given to the petitioners to approach the trial Court with appropriate application for the discharge. If such application is filed, the Court is at liberty to provide opportunity to both the parties and dispose of the application, in accordance with law. In view of disposal of the petition 5 itself, I.A.II/17 for stay does not survive for consideration and the same is accordingly, disposed of.

Petition dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sb/bnv