Karnataka High Court
Sri.Pradeep Eshwar vs State Of Karnataka on 19 July, 2021
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
CRL.P.2033/2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRL.P.No.2033/2021
BETWEEN:
SRI.PRADEEP ESHWAR
S/O. LATE. ESHWAR,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
LECTURER,
PERESANDRA,
CHIKKABALLAPURA.
PRESENTLY AT
IN FRONT OF MAKKALAKOOTA,
CHAMARAJPETE,
BANGALORE 560018. ... PETITIONER
(BY MISS SOFIYA FOR
SRI KAMALUDDIN AHMAD, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN POLICE STATION,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE 560001.
2. SRI. SUDHAKAR K.
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
PERESANDRA,
CHIKKABALLAPUR 562104. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.D.RENUKARADHYA, HCGP FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED:24.05.2021)
CRL.P.2033/2021
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C,
praying to quash the entire further proceedings in
C.C.No.398/2019 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge
and CJM, Chikkaballapura for the offence P/U/S 171G of IPC
(Annexure-A).
This petition coming on for Admission, this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for respondent no.1-State.
2. Petitioner, who is the sole accused in C.C.No.398/2019 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chickaballapur, arising out of Crime No.138/2018 registered by Chickaballapura Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 171G of IPC, has approached this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in the said case.
3. Brief facts of the case as revealed from the records are, a complaint was filed by respondent no.2 herein on 02.05.2018 alleging that the petitioner herein had made CRL.P.2033/2021 3 various allegations against the complainant on social media platform from his mobile number violating the model code of conduct that was in force during the assembly elections. The said complaint was initially registered as NCR No.118/2018. Thereafter, respondent no.1 had made a requisition to the learned Magistrate seeking permission to register the case against the petitioner. The learned Magistrate has permitted the respondent-police to register the case by endorsing on the very requisition itself. Thereafter, the respondent-Police have registered an FIR in Crime No.138/2018 for the offence under Section 171G IPC against the petitioner. After investigation, the police have filed the charge sheet. Being aggrieved by the criminal proceedings now initiated, petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the offence under Section 171G IPC, is a non-cognizable offence, and therefore, the police before the registering the case, ought to have obtained permission from the CRL.P.2033/2021 4 jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 155(2) Cr.PC, and the same has not been done in the present case, and therefore, in the absence of such a permission as required under Section 155(2) Cr.PC, the learned Magistrate ought not to have taken cognizance of the alleged offences.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP opposing the petition submits that immediately after receiving the complaint, a requisition has been submitted to the jurisdictional Magistrate on 02.05.2018 itself and on the requisition itself, the learned Magistrate has passed an order permitting the police to register the case and investigate the same. He submits that since the charge sheet has already been filed, the accused person is liable to be tried for the alleged offence.
6. The only offence alleged against the petitioner in the present case is under Section 171G of IPC. The said offence is admittedly a non-cognizable offence, and therefore, compliance of Section 155(2) Cr.PC is mandatory. In the case on hand, on the requisition CRL.P.2033/2021 5 submitted by the police, the learned Magistrate has made an endorsement to the effect that permission is granted.
7. This Court in Crl.P.No.101997/2019 disposed of on 10.12.2019, has held that such an endorsement made by the learned Magistrate on the requisition letter is not a compliance of requirement of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. This Court has held that the learned Magistrate is required to pass an order to the said effect in a separate order sheet which is required to be maintained in which subsequent proceedings of the case is required to be continued and endorsement made in the requisition letter would not suffice the compliance of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C.
8. In the instant case, as could be seen from the entire charge sheet, no such permission has been taken by the police to investigate the offence under Section 171G of IPC. Therefore, the aforesaid judgment of this Court is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. The endorsement made by the learned Magistrate in the requisition submitted by the police cannot be considered CRL.P.2033/2021 6 as an order under Section 155(2) Cr.PC and as held by this Court in the aforesaid judgment, the learned Magistrate ought to have passed such an order in a separate order sheet which is required to be maintained. The same having not been done, the entire proceedings gets vitiated. Under the circumstances, continuation of further proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law and for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, the impugned criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:
9. Criminal petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in C.C.No.398/2019 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Chickaballapur, arising out of Crime No.138/2018 registered by Chickaballapura Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 171G of IPC, stands quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KK