Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

B. R. Bhaskar Prasad vs State By Sanjayanagar Ps on 11 March, 2024

Author: S Vishwajith Shetty

Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty

                                                     -1-
                                                                NC: 2024:KHC:9891
                                                              WP No. 5289 of 2024




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

                                                BEFORE

                           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

                             WRIT PETITION NO.5289 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    B. R. BHASKAR PRASAD
                            S/O LATE P. RAMAPRASAD
                            AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
                            R/AT LOHITNAGAR
                            NELAMANGALA
                            BANGALORE-562 123.
                                                                      ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI MOHAMMED TAHIR, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.    STATE BY SANJAYANAGAR PS
                            REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                            OFFICE AT HIGH COURT COMPLEX
Digitally signed by         OPP. TO VIDHANA SOUDHA
V MANJUSHA BAI
                            BENGALURU-560 001.
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
                      2.    DR. CHI. NA. RAMU
                            AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
                            R/AT NO. 17/1
                            14TH MAIN ROAD
                            MLA LAYOUT, DOLLARS COLONY
                            RMV 2ND STAGE
                            SANJAYANAGAR
                            BANGALORE-560 094.
                                                                   ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESH, ADDL.SPP FOR
                          SRI R.RANGASWAMY, HCGP FOR R1)
                              -2-
                                           NC: 2024:KHC:9891
                                         WP No. 5289 of 2024




      THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C
PRAYING TO QUASH THE COGNIZANCE ORDER 22/07/2019 IN CC
NO.19028/2019 AT ANNEXURE-D ARISING OUT OF CRIME
NO.174/2018    REGISTERED    BY  THE   RESPONDENT   POLICE
SANJAYNAGAR PS U/S 504, 507, 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE
OF HON'BLE 8TH ADDL. CMM COURT, BANGALORE, WHEREIN THE
PETITIONER ARRAYED AS SOLE ACCUSED, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY ETC.

      THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:



                          ORDER

1. Petitioner is before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.19028/2019 pending before the Court of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.174/2018 registered by Sanjay Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 507 read with 34 of IPC.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged offences are non-cognizable in nature and FIR has been registered without complying the requirements of -3- NC: 2024:KHC:9891 WP No. 5289 of 2024 Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. He submits that the learned Magistrate has granted permission to register the FIR and investigate the case on the requisition submitted by the Investigating Officer and the same cannot be considered as compliance of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C.

4. The learned Additional SPP appearing for respondent No.1 after perusing the material on record does not seriously oppose the prayer made in the petition.

5. Undisputedly, FIR was registered by Sanjay Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru City against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 504, 507 and 34 of IPC which are non-cognizable offences. Therefore, compliance of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. becomes mandatory. The material on record would go to show that the learned Magistrate has endorsed in the requisition submitted by the Investigating Officer that he is permitted to register the case and investigate. This Court in the case of Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi v. State of Karnataka in Criminal Petition No.101997/2019 (DD 10.12.2019) has -4- NC: 2024:KHC:9891 WP No. 5289 of 2024 held that such an endorsement will not comply the requirement of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. In addition to the same, the order sheet of the trial court would also reflect that permission granted by the learned Magistrate under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. does not find place in the ordeer sheet. Therefore, I am of the view that in view of the law laid down by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi v. State of Karnataka in Criminal Petition No.101997/2019 (DD 10.12.2019), the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained.

6. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed;
(ii) The entire proceedings in C.C.No.19028/2019 pending before the Court of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.174/2018 registered by Sanjay Nagar Police Station for the -5- NC: 2024:KHC:9891 WP No. 5289 of 2024 offences punishable under Sections 504, 507 read with 34 of IPC is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE hkh.