Karnataka High Court
Sri.Narasimha Prasad vs Sri.M.D.Muthappa on 15 October, 2009
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE'
Dated this the 15*" day of October, 2009
Before
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HUl;UiV/AB! t G "
Criminal Petitiot; 2637K/__ 2349
Between:
1
Sri Narasimha Prasad, 47 yrs
S/o fate Suryanarayana Rae,'
Smt Suma W/0 Narasimha
37 YYS . *
Both are rfa O8:r3;"'i'_fl" Crorssi V.
T K Layouv1;"Mysot'e-
Sri A rshaiixaga ;13'r?;.sad,~4y{V1ry:rS '' '--
S/0 l:_1te Suryanrarayana Ra0'~,_
Smt Vang Rao', 37' "
S/0 ShankararPrasad V
Bqfii 'are: r/a # 3;';:5_;'3"'& Main
L?-.v,0m. Mysore" %%%%% ~ '
A ' ;. S"1i.M'RVSafyarrarayana Rao, 57 yrs
S/0 Hfkamaswvamy
ASH}: PQor'ni15:i~a; 52 yrs
Wfo Satyanarayana Rao
" Both aré r/a # I10, 2"': Main Road
,MLA Layout, R T Nagar, Bangaiore
V' iSri M Puttaswamy S/o K P Madaiah
542 yrs, R/0 'Kuber', # 984/1
)3"
Bogadi 11 Stage, Nirmithi Kendra Road g ,
Bogadi, Mysore Petitioners
(By Sri Ravi B Naik Assts., Adv.)
And:
Sri M D Muthappa S/o M a Devaiah
62 yrs, R/0 Suntikoppa Village
Riverside Estate, Kodagu District
By his PA Holder -- C M Medappa
# 733, 10"' MainRoad . - . --
Vijayanagar I Stage, Mysore * Respondent
(By Sri C H Jadhav, Adv.) .
This Criminal', Petlitipn isAfiied_:'end¢;1;~..§.f'i8n2'oi? the Cr.PC praying to quash the proceedings in §?C_53.$z'20U8 beforethe Ji\/EFC II, Mysore. This Criminal -i:_i5etitio'n lon7for'}Adn1ission this day, the Court made the foilo.wing:.__ ' ._ 11 Petitioners hav-esou'ght quashing the proceedings in CC 538/2008 I-lniriitiated"ifor tile offences punisiaable under S466, 468, 47: and 420 r/W 5.34, Regardirrg a land dispute, a private complaint has been filed. Learned 4M'agistrate"A_%1as taken cognizance and ordered to register the PCR. On perusal
-.__of:the§order sheet, it is seen, learned Magistrate has signed the typed order W, which indicates non-application of mind. That too, it is very specific that the complaint is filed under the provisions of [PC In stead of taking cognizance for the above said offences or passing any other appropriate Vor_dcrs,"he. proceeded to take cognizance under S.138 of the Negotiable'instruments V' « which is neither the case of the petitioners nor"'t'he.cas,e of theijrespoinclent complainant.
In the circumstances, the impugnediporderppof taking..c.o§nizance is quashed with a direction to the"*,Magis--:rate :.to.ii'pi*:Cceed_ from the stage of cognizance in accordarlcewith law.' " 'Pet.itior;.is.a1Ioix1ed.; it An . JUDGE