Karnataka High Court
Subhas Narayana Pulake vs Bapusab Hasansab Bagawan on 2 February, 2010
INTHHSHHHJCOURTCH?KARNATAKACHRCUFFBBNCH
ATDHARWAD w"ak
DATED nus THE 02"" DAY OF FEBRUAR_Yfw2fi'»%V_'Q«.j:J
BEFORE
THE H()N'BLE MR. JUSTICE A_RA;LiT'NA§§Am.'5':._,,,_
CRL.P.NO.4'7_83V/20VO9'V' A
BETWEEN: 'V
I. Subhas Narayana Pui"a.k'e.'
S/0. Narayan Pukafe T
Aged 62 yearsgy I . »
R/o. Maha1iB'g?~P1ir,
Tq: Mudhp},VQié.t.:{.B'ag_a,lkQt.'-7
2. Sadashiv-.Sh'a_nkéi?_.app--a Nyarnago"ud
Aged: 45 yéa7rts,t.t
R/0. .L1akshminag'a1-,d _
Hunachduif Roadd-,_ Jan--1khafid'i.
3. G.B.;KoujaIag.i'A 'd
S/{_v.'~:'«Ba_s'appa Kdouyxlagi
'"Age'd: Years, Occ: Advocate,
R./'d;V.JamAa3§ha'r;-di, Dist: Bagalkot.
S'.R§Kadagi'i.
V V 'V ' S/o';««._Ra,.__m'a-p«--pa Kadagi
é Aged... years, Occ: Advocate,
" 7-V"'R/Q.JaIi1-khandi, Dist: Bagalkot.
kt Kale, Advocate.)
(mmrvwxw
...Petiti0ners.
AND:
Bapusab Hasansab Bagawan
Aged about 44 years,
R/o. Jarnkhandi, Dist: Bagaikot.
(By Sri.ParshWanath V. G-unjal, Advocate.)
This Criminal Petition is filed iii}/S:.i4ilSf2u'Cr:.iP;--Ci§'~»bvy'Vt.h.ei'
advocate for the petitioner praying t19ia_t't_hi'is H'c.n"b.1e C;ourt'._V
may be pleased to set aside sth-e_ orderdated"j8_/8/2§00i9_7
passed by the JMFC, Jamakhairi-di, inV§3'..C.N7o.i1"/2000
(C.C.No.37/2009) and quash the___eVi*stvire_»proceedings in the
said case. " i
This petition coming day, the
Court made the fol1o:wi_ng:i'° * V. ' '
Though this Iisted today for admission,
having regard toiiiithienatuire of the prayer sought for in this
sssiissgiiissi U/"S._ec.482 of C1'.P.C., it is taken for final
disposai-i'___biy"'vitii*i.e_ dohsent of the learned counsei for the
i'v:'ggpet.itione"r"' ari-ditiie learned High Court Government Pieader.
.1 -Tirieggisr arsigslmeiints on merits are heard.
s..._ar"""'"'"~«~"
2) The accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.3.W-2009
('P.C.No.1/2000) on the file of the learned
Jamakhandi, have challenged in this petitionthe~-corriecétiress,'Vlii"
of order dated 18/8/2009
registering a Criminal Case,*againls"t_ithese""'pAe.t'i_tiojiersf>
accused. The petitioners have alsi'o.i_so.u'ght"for_:nduaishing of
entire proceedings in came to be
registered on the fileof the"s'arlnelCiotlirtlilpursiiant to the said
impugned order.
3) lleading to the present
petition U/Siec.i48d2 as under:
The"'---virvespondent herein, namely
"S/o.Hasansab Bagawan, filed his
" -El/S ec.200 of Cr.P.C. in
against all these present
'.V_petitiione_rsli for the offences U/Secs.120-A,
209, 403 and 420 r/w.Sec.34 of IPC.
e._}\._lft'er'i the said complaint was filed, the same
"was referred to the police U/Sec.i56(3) of
Cr.P.C. for investigation. After investigation
the police submitted 'B summary' report.
said report was opposed by the compla_iA"nl*ant:i:'.i§"'* ii
by filing his objections to itpgon V
Thereafter the learned
sworn statement of the coiinpil-ainanVt.."_,on' _
3/7/2003 and his rurlméggrttiit state-rn_e'nt_i'_= i
10/8/2005. i
b) On the baisisersihe agvtérsmeims in
the said complaint sltatelment of
the compI.a.ir:.:,anit:_,:i'::theipggarneq./JiMFC"piassed the
i1npugnedi.,V.o;€_dle:r directing
registratiioindof against all the
accused and issuing
summons" again st ._thern
.fr°~S;r.it:.A.tnil iKa'1"e','l the learned counsel for the
petiti_iot:e_r's»accjusledi"strongly contended that, the learned
C0..Il11mVit.te'd--'lserious error in passing the impugned
....;5v;@__er-'»»dated..1.3:'/8/2009 and inasmuch as, the said order does
_di.s"c»lo.se for what offences process has been issued
ag.:ai'n-»st-lithe petitioners-accused. He further contended that
,_s.i.<"w"~---~"
'7»out',Vagair1.stH; the petitioners--accused, the
the learned JMFC has not whispered in the impugn.e:d.,,i_:o.r,der
about the 'B summary' report submitted
concerned after investigation of the_c,a_se
passed U/Sec.l56(3) of Cr.P.C. enngeeteempireujgfi'
respondent--eomplainant
proceedings in the said.' crime-i-nal"--c'ase deserve to be quashed.
5) Per cointifya»,ivSr:i'-.,P§}/iGuinjal,the learned counsel for the respoiri.de:nitj-_com'p<lai'riarit,i iérhile supporting the impugned o,rde_r.ofith-erleairned,JMFC contends that, though the learned niiopptiiispecifically stated in his imvpugnedftioirder as what offences process has been issued1against«_the'"--accused therein, the facts alleged in the compia-i,nt«.i'anidisgtaitted in the sworn statement clearly make offences en,,U/jse[eesi,409,, 420 and 120-A of IPC and therefore the order cannot be interfered with only on this ieefgtencihtnical ground. He further contended that, the averments :__~_f-r"\__r__\__ and ._v:""-Vthereiforet V entire"
in the complaint and the sworn statement of-.pthe complainant clearly disclose the commission offences by the accused therein and therefo_r,e_:"V.avlii~i..:fu.rther--..V9° proceedings in the said criminal case cannfot'-..be._'q'ua'sh.r;'cl..,gs prayed for by the petitioners here-i..n.
6) Stated in brief. case'" lithe pii*os'ee'1ition as averred in his complaint U/Sec.200 of Cr.P.C. before the.vl'e:arp11ed::i_JMF.C V
a)W V father and accused _l\l_ioi;'.:'..\.q'i.oi5nitl3i.:i"helcl the land bearing *"rneasuring 8 acres situated The father of the conrplaiiinant,.iname_l_yv late Hasansab Bagawan, ii.io:w_,rii1i:Ved_.i :4-iéaeres and accused No.2 owned in the said land. Acquisition pro.i;'eed.ings.--'were initiated in respect of the _i<._entire" Vvfii§'i'1.acres of the said land. Award also to be passed. The father of the compilainant and accused No.2 were entitled "to 50% of the award amount.
\»' attorney. Thought the records disclose that the comp'l"a,inant produced as many as six documents which _..h_a_V.€:'fibei€.n marked as Exs.P.l to 13.6, the said power one of the said documents.
8) On careful reading._v:o-f_ the" .averim.:en~.ts"""in: the"? complaint and the sworn,.statevm*ein't--.ptithei lic'ornp"i§ainant it could be seen that, no assigned by the complainantgsaid power of attorney. atguntents, the learned counsel submitted the said power of attorney by late father of the COITlplE1iI"1:dI1t_A.iI]iil:£i"l_tgl;1l: of accused N0.i, but accused No.3 unconnected with the execution of the saidiip.o'w_er of"a.t_to~r'r'1'ey and therefore issuing process against acr;usediiil"i'~io;'-3'. and 4 on the allegation of the complainant .1 power of attorney came to be falsely created A"ii_"-.b_y'««.acc§used No.1 in collusion with and in connivance of act-rused N0s.3 and 4 cannot be sustained in law. Therefore r_Mg"v----~v\.u.
since the existence of power of attorney said to haxifegbeen executed by the father of the complainant accused No}. is not in dispute, I feel that non__pr~oVdtii.cti_onii 'of, either original or copy of the said power of1att.o3'-nie*3_ztat'the stage of taking cognizance and' issuin"g_procee.s's"'against theft» accused is not fatal to the case ofiiithe ctompilainantfli
9) On careful order it could be seen that has ordered to register the case' Register No.3 and to issue sumrrions not specified in the impugned offences alleged in the complaint«..th.eiipr*«o9_ie'$'S issued against the accused submitted by the learned counsel for the"petit'io'n,ers}accused, the learned Magistrate has not i":fioibs_erved""' impugned order, anything about the 4:.:if:iBisu:rnr;':ary5i report submitted by the police after of the investigation. Therefore I am of the ii"~..icorisidered opinion that since no case is made out by the .»...s"*w»~»--=--
I0 complainant against accused Nos.3 and 4 for any of» the offences alleged in the complaint issuing proceys's'.agai.n'st them cannot be sustained in law. Besid_es~.__t'h'_i's,i'4 tih'e__i'=~ impugned order has to be set aside:;.ifori_lt'n«ei"«reas'ons,qt_hait__it' does not disclose the offences which 'process ordieredik to be issued against the accused
10) For the reasonsiiatioreisayild; petition is allowed in part? 18/8/2009 passed by the Jamakhandi, in P.C.N'o.1/2{)'OiO" of Criminal Case against acciii'seid- and issuing process against aside. Further, all further are hereby quashed only as again"s.t'5facc'us'cVd Tnos.3 and 4 therein. The matter is ii'v:'giireirntanded"to=§the"learned JMFC with a direction to consider 4: report, the averments in the complaint and the V.".""..3wo'rnh"staternent of the complainant afresh, apply his mind V"-._toi"t.he contents thereof, and then dispose of the matter in r'~'-§\~""'"'*-»--'"' I1 accordance with law stating specifically as to forfwhich offences and against which of the accused Criminal Case is to be registered and pi'QQ(i§S.s,. £0 issued. N0 order as to costs.
i iif3'U:2<;E Mrkl -