Karnataka High Court
Basavaraj S/O Ramappa Khangond vs The Cpi, Athani Police Station, on 13 June, 2017
Author: R.B Budihal
Bench: R.B Budihal.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BUDIHAL. R.B
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101126/2017
BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJ S/O RAMAPPA KHANGOND
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: REPORTER,
R/O: ALAGUR, TQ: JAMKHANDI,
DIST: BAGALKOT.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NARAYAN V YAJI, ADV.)
AND
1. THE CPI, ATHANI POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP,
OFFICE OF ADVOCATE GENERAL,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD BENCH,
DHARWAD.
2. BHIMASHANKAR S. PATIL
S/O SHIVASHARANAPPA,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: SOCIAL WORKER,
R/O: SANGALAGI, TQ: ALAND,
DIST: KALABURGI.
3. KASHINATH RAMAPPA KARIKOLLA
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
:2:
R/O: HALALLI, TQ: ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
4. BHIMANNA @ GUNDU KEDARI KURI
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O: ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
5. HANAMANT MAHANTESH TALIKOTI
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: TUNGAL, NOW AT ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
6. SHRISHAIL PRAKASH MOKSHI
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KARIKATTI, TQ: ATHANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 407 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO WITHDRAW
THE C.C.NO.1553 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I
ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ATHANI AND
TRANSFER THE SAME TO ANY JMFC COURT IN THE
BELGAUM DISTRICT FOR TRAIL AND DISPOSAL CASE
ON MERIT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT, MADE THE FOLLOWING:
:3:
ORDER
Though the matter is listed for orders, but with consent of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned HCGP, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. seeking the Court to withdraw C.C.No.1553/2017 on the file of I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC Athani and transfer the same to any JMFC Court in Belgaum District for trial and disposal of the case in accordance with law.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution case as averred in the petition that petitioner is working in Electronic Media and also press media, and petitioner's several sensational reports/news/stories were broadcasted in Janashri News Channel in the programme called 'Crime Loka'. 2nd respondent, who is the complainant, and his henchmen, extracting money from bureaucrats, :4: businessmen and other class of the society by way of black mailing. As the petitioner being the programme Director of Janashree TV channel 'Crime Loka' has brought true colour of 2nd respondent and his henchmen by reporting true story. Under this background, 2nd respondent has lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. When this being the state of affairs, on 09.02.2015 afternoon, when the petitioner was standing in front of Chikkodi Court, one Prashant Rajaput and his supporters were given life threat by saying that the episode of Bassava Prabhu Swamiji rape case and rape case of PSI Nadaf of Belagaum on 08.02.2015 broadcasted in Crime Loka of Janashree TV Channel is directly connected to them and hence, they have been insulted, therefore, threatened that again such type of story covering the truth in said TV Channel, the petitioner shall have to face serious consequences. Accordingly, the petitioner has lodged complaint with Chikkodi Police Station on :5: 11.02.2015 and said complaint registered bearing Crime No.25/2015 for the alleged offences. Police after holding investigation, filed charge sheet on 10.11.2015 in C.C.No.1397/2016 on the file of learned Prl. JMFC, Chikkodi, as against all the accused persons. The persons, who have threatened the petitioner are none other than the friends/supporters/henchmen of 2nd respondent herein. The petitioner is also receiving threatening call from the supporters of 2nd respondent from Athani. The master mind and person behind it is none other than 2nd respondent herein. As and when the petitioner received the threatening call and verbal threat, has informed to the Police, however, the Police have told the petitioner that they have already filed charge sheet in Court, pursuance of the complaint lodged by him and asked the petitioner to chalk out remedy in the pending criminal case before the Court of law. 2nd respondent involved in antisocial activities and extract money from people of different category/vocation :6: by taking undue advantage of technology with the support of his henchmen. Hence, he has sought for transfer of the case from Athani JMFC Court to any other criminal Court in Belagavi District.
4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.1 and also the learned HCGP appearing for the respondent No.1-State.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while submitting his arguments, has made it clear that there is no any sort of grievance as against the Presiding Officer of the Court at Athani, so also, there is no grievance on the Police machinery in Athani Taluk. But his grievance is that some persons threatened him at Chikkodi Court and because of that reason, the petitioner herein is having apprehension that the supporters of respondent No.2/complainant may take some illegal methods against him. Learned counsel :7: has submitted that petitioner is ready to face the said criminal case in any other Court at Belagavi District, except at Athani Court. Hence, submitted to allow the petition and to transfer the said criminal case to any other Court at Belagavi District.
6. Per contra, learned HCGP has submitted that looking to the ingredients of Section 407 of Cr.P.C., the case is not made out by the petitioner seeking transfer. He has submitted that because of the incident alleged to have taken place before Chikkodi Court, it cannot be presumed that same things will happen if the petitioner appear before the Court at Athani. There is no material placed by the prosecution to allow the petition and to transfer the criminal case to any other Court at Belagavi District.
7. I have perused the grounds urged in the petition, so also, the documents produced in the case :8: and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides.
8. Looking to the petition averments, it is no doubt true at paragraph No.5, it is pleaded by the petitioner that some threat was posed to him when he was standing infront of Chikkodi Court by some elements, but looking to paragraph No.6 of the petition, there are bald and vague allegations, there is no specific allegation, it is the anticipation of the petitioner that such things may happen if he is going to attend the Court at Athani. Only on the basis of such bald and vague allegations, it cannot be said that the petitioner has made out a case seeking transfer of the proceedings. If there is an apprehension, firstly he can make a request before the concerned Police seeking to give him protection while attending the said case. Therefore, looking to the materials placed on record, I am of the opinion that the ingredients and the :9: requirements of Section 407 of Cr.P.C. are not made out by the petitioner to allow the petition. Hence, petition is hereby rejected.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A.No.1/2017 does not survive for consideration, accordingly, same is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE BSR