Karnataka High Court
Sole Trustee Of vs The State Of Karnataka By on 21 December, 2018
Author: P.S.Dinesh Kumar
Bench: P.S. Dinesh Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9477 OF 2018
BETWEEN:
Sole Trustee of
Dr.M.C.Modi Public Trust,
Subhash Chandra M.Modi,
S/o. Late Mahanthappa,
Aged about 62 years,
West of Chord Road,
Padmabhushan, Dr.M.C.Modi Road,
IX Cross, V Main, Mahalaxmipuram,
Bengaluru-560 086. ... Petitioner
(By Sri.K.Subba Rao, Sr.Advocate for
Sri. Rajeswara.P.N, Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka by
Mahalaxmipuram Police Station,
Mahalaxmipuram,
Bengaluru-560 086.
2. Tahsildar,
Bangalore North Taluk,
Kandaya Bhavan,
K.G.Road, Bengaluru-560 009. ... Respondents
(By Sri. S.Rachaiah, HCGP)
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C praying to quash the order dated 22.09.2018 bearing
No.MAG (107) Cr.392/2013-14 passed by the 2nd respondent
vide Annexure-A and quash the order dated 22.09.2018
bearing No.MAG (107) Cr.392/2013-14 passed by the 2nd
respondent vide Annexure-B.
This Criminal Petition coming on for admission, this
day, the court made the following:
ORDER
Heard.
2. Sri K.Subba Rao, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that certain proceedings under Sections 145 and 146 of Cr.P.C. were initiated in the year 2014 against the petitioner-Trust and the same were not given effect to. Subsequently, the order dated 16.12.2016 was passed by second respondent appointing a Receiver. The said order was challenged before this Court in Crl.P.No.275/2017. This Court by order dated 23.08.2018 allowed the said petition by holding thus:
3
"Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order bearing No.MAG(107)CR 392/2013-14 dated 16.12.2016 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-M is set aside and the matter is remitted to respondent No.2 to proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with Sections 145 and 146 of the Code in the light of the observations made in this order.
In the event, respondent No.2 finds it necessary to make any arrangement either by way of attachment or by way of appointment of a Receiver, he shall do so in accordance with the provisions of Section 145 and 146 of the Cr.P.C. within 30 days from the date of this order. Until then for a period of 30 days from today, by way of interim arrangement, the Special Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluk, shall act as the Receiver of 'Padmabhushana Dr.M.C.Modi Public Trust'."
3. Subsequently, second respondent passed the impugned orders dated 22.09.2018 (Annexures-A and B) forming an opinion that it was appropriate to attach the properties, took over charge of the trust 4 properties and also directed attachment of the properties belonging to the Trust without issuing notice to the petitioner-Trust.
4. Sri K.Subba Rao contended that the impugned orders are unsustainable on more than one count. Firstly, that no notice is issued to the petitioner and secondly, that the orders are passed by second respondent in his capacity as a Tahsildar, whereas Sections 145 and 146 of Cr.P.C. empowers an Executive Magistrate to pass such orders.
5. Sri Rachaiah, learned HCGP, in his usual fairness, does not dispute the fact that no notice was served on the petitioner before passing the impugned orders.
6. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. The impugned orders dated 22.09.2018 vide Annexures-A and B are quashed. The matter is remitted to second respondent who is also the Executive Magistrate to pass 5 fresh orders in accordance with law after issuing notice to the petitioner-trust and hearing them.
7. In view of disposal of the petition, I.As.No.1 & 2 do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed of.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE akc/