Sri Navin Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 January, 2018

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Navin Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 January, 2018

Bench: K.N.Phaneendra

                             1


 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JANUARY 2018

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

        CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4544 OF 2017


BETWEEN:

SRI.NAVIN KUMAR
S/O PTTAPPA SHETTY
AGE: 37 YEARS
KAMMARADI VILLAGE, KOPPA
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 125
(PRESENTLY LODGED IN
CENTRAL PRISON, BENGALURU
CONVICT NO.8843)                           ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI.DHARANESHA, ADV. FOR SRI.R.SIDDESWARA, ADV.)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
   BY DODDAPETE P.S.
   SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT
   REPRESENTED BY 577201
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
   HIGH COURT BUILDING
   BANGALORE - 560 001

2. H.G.VIRUPAKSHAPPA
   S/O H.V.B.GANGADARAPPA
   AGE: 48 YEARS
   MAGA NILAYA, 5TH CROSS
   RANGANATHA LAYOUT, GOPALA
   SHIVAMOGA TOWN - 577 201           ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.S.RAHCAIAH, HCGP)
                            ---
                             2


      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., praying to quash the impugned FIR and charge
sheet and subsequently proceedings against the petitioner
(accused No.4) in Cr.No.159/2013, C.C.No.558/2014 of
Doddapet P.S., which is pending before the II JMFC,
Shivamogga vide Annexure-A and B to secure.

      This Petition coming on for Admission this day, the
Court made the following:-


                         ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the High Court Government Pleader.

2. This petition is filed seeking quashing of C.C.No.558/2014 pending on the file of II JMFC Court, Shivamogga.

3. On perusal of the entire charge sheet papers, the police have charge sheeted the accused / petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 384 and 511 of IPC. The materials collected by the police reveal that this petitioner was a life convict in some other case and he was indulged in making extortion call to the complainant in collusion with the other accused persons. 3 The police have recorded the statement of co-accused persons and also some call list and produced before the Court.

4. How the prosecution wants to connect the accused with that call list and whether that is sufficient to proceed with the accused, has to be ascertained by the Trial Court at the time of framing of charges. If no other evidence are available except the voluntary statement of the accused, then the Court can pass appropriate orders with regard to the framing of charges, or discharging the accused.

5. When the charge sheet has been filed already, and so many witnesses have been examined, in my opinion, the learned Magistrate has to look into these materials and pass appropriate orders with regard to framing of charges.

6. The petitioner is at liberty to file necessary application for his discharge before the Trial Court. The Trial Court is hereby directed to consider such application within two months from the date of filing of such application and dispose of the same in accordance with law. If the petitioner is aggrieved by such order, he can approach the competent Court.

7. With such liberty, the petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE RV

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court