Karnataka High Court
Mikha Barboza S/O Late Peter Assis ... vs State Of Karnataka on 13 July, 2010
Author: Subhash B.Adi
Bench: Subhash B.Adi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARHATAKA AT BANGALORE ILIATEIZ) THIS TI-IE 3.3"?" EA? C}? JULY 2910 BEFORE Tm HGFFBLE mm. JUSTICE SUBHASH B, . Mildm Barbom Sio Late Peter Awia Barbofia R] 1:; :1f92'7[ 1, V Rajanukufi B%m'x1 - 561 203. Axmita Barbaza Wla . RI0 01' 93?'! "1 2 ' . RamiReéay%A S/0 1-2gaay~ X % R] qr ; EDA' %Mm'aw®1¥a3aya - 017, . of Karnatalm = 1% t (crkfij Harm Eapartmmt Gofint af Karnatam Vidhan Soudha, [email protected]. . ,PETfI'IC.)1'IERS (By Sr. Counsel for Cariappa & £30., ma. 2. The. Inspector at' Police Airport Road Police Station Bengnlm-u City. .
('BySriB.Ba1a1:riabna. I-ICGPfo1-R1 am} % % Thi petition il filed 1.1/3.4-32 of Cr.P.C~~ 129 "
No.OE-81 dama Karnntnka pursuant to_ of C£.P.C. (Anneurure-P1] and to to % formulate guidelines ciqmmmuon of Section %%% % A % £ara_mm A ' ianizhi day, the Court ._ ' . called in question the proceedings L in on the 51. of th: web % 4.1q1.¢.M.M:.. Mayo Hall. Bangalore. An'pm't' Rand Police mgh tanad a case in '" fi2fQfio.3/10 dated O4.01.2{I)9 fin: flu ofiannu 4punhhabks under Sections 'H8, 153-A, 295-A r/w ck) Seas'? «of I.P.C. On inveetgatiaon, the police filad charga shaetw?mtt11aa:x:x1aad. Thelearnad Magzltrairby order dated 23.05.2*% took oogxmzm of the cfi'<::xf.&.s_ amgaa and z-mszmaa 3 was in C.C.I*¥o.22841/Q§}{)§;}i§ '2 H agw' t the said ordm, 12% petifian has been . H
3. Sri.Ravi B.Haik, laarned T pefitinneru aumitmd W' m» k the pefitioners being one 153-5, 295~A and 443 at" : ;:-ac; finder Section 153% ofI.P._C... ' 195 of the said afi?am:e, the Caurt of the ofiieme without prr.mr' 3 gm _, t er the State "Hg: aubmitm that sub-section (3) cf requires the Central t : -:_-r befare according aanothm 1%(1~A} shafi hold ' ' mquhv « ofis.':er mt heiaw the rank of Inspector.
A 4. Pk relim on the aanctian aowrded by an an 24.4-.2®9 and stzbm% that dam 5::
' LU noapplficafisnofmmortherefiumgypmliminary enquiry it 1-fieirae to the statemmxm of peraom. Even assuming tha prei apfional, but the order of sanctam' must £§e~ reason for proeeeutéan, admittedly; revealanyofthermsorm.
4. Learned HCGP su§Lm;%a§g: sagta§n:9a%gAa; of C3:'.P.C.. dam mt ahaukl hold an enaeguix-;z§a;:§V::1VL:i&t 1:: hold
5. the Cr.P.C. requires sanction accused. The Same Govermmt vifyframfa « fifisr pmsmmtion nfthe cf 1.9.0., it has apply in its ha th: o1rcuraa' tans.-es and if it firfis an names shouki have been ,_ .. .. of ' . nun-3 .
any masam,I ma sanction atxxzrded %byam%$.a§2m;-mmemhmahxmw.
6. Amorcflnagly, petfiion Tm allowad and the sanction amen 24.4.2609 accorded by the sum Ge is quashaad and the ffi C.C.II::.22841]2OG9 on the file ofthxe 10:: mm.c.m;k:gy;%;kLL%%% % Maya Han Banmm, damfi 23.65.2009 *3 also new-em, iiberty as ram-mi m tzm mmon if it feela nawesaary in V required undaem Section zfiégsz gs flai-
pr*<mwu&onoftmaeeus¢d.,x T -- V' Sr}.