Hadapad Mallayya vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 March, 2022

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Hadapad Mallayya vs The State Of Karnataka on 14 March, 2022

Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar

                              1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                    DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF MARCH 2022
                          BEFORE
  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
           CRIMINAL PETITION No.100418/2022
BETWEEN

Hadapad Mallayya, S/o Eashappa,
Age: 40 years, Occ: Farmer,
R/o Hatcholli Village, Tq: Siruguppa,
Dist: Ballari-583101.                        ...Petitioner

(By Sri. B.C.Jnanayyaswami, Advocate)

AND

The State of Karnataka,
Rep. by its SPP, High Court
 of Karnataka, Bench,
Dharwad-580001.
(Through Hatcholli P.S).                   ...Respondent

(By Sri. Ramesh Chigari, HCGP)

      This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash
the entire proceedings in C.C. No.669/2021 on the file of
the Civil Judge and JMFC Court Siruguppa (arising out of
Crime No.39/2021 registered by Hatcholli P.S.) for the
offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka
Police Act, 1963, and 354B, 506, 504 323, 324 read with
Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, by allowing the
criminal petition.
                              2




      This criminal petition coming on for Admission this
day, the Court made the following:

                          ORDER

Sri. Ramesh Chigari, learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent.

2. Heard Sri. B.C.Jnanayyaswami, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. The petitioner in this petition is calling in question the initiation of the criminal proceedings in C.C. No.669/2021 pending on the file of the Civil Judge & JMFC Court, Siruguppa, for the offence punishable under Sections 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.

4. The FIR registered against the petitioner is for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act, which is a non-cognizable offence, and as such, the police before registering the FIR were required to obtain permission under Section 155(2) of 3 Cr.P.C. The police sent requisition to the learned Magistrate so as to grant permission to register the FIR. On the said requisition, the learned Magistrate made an endorsement "permitted". The police after investigation filed charge sheet against the petitioner for the aforesaid offence. However, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Act and also for various other offences punishable under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which indicates that the learned Magistrate has not applied his judicious mind in taking cognizance of the offences.

5. The issue with regard obtaining of prior permission of the Magistrate by the police to register a case in respect of a non-cognizable offence is covered by the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.101632/2021, disposed of on 21.09.2021. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the said petition has 4 held that the endorsement "permitted" is not an order in the eye of law as specified under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. and that no order should be passed on the requisition itself. In the present case, the learned Magistrate, without application of mind, has made an endorsement on the requisition "permitted" which does not constitute an order granting permission, as specified under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C, so as to register the FIR. Hence, the impugned FIR registered by the police is in violation of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER The criminal petition is allowed. The initiation of proceedings in C.C. No.669/2021 on the file of the Civil Judge & JMFC, Siruguppa, insofar as it relates to the petitioner herein is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE Kms

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court