Karnataka High Court
Basavarajaswamy vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 June, 2023
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
CRL.P.No.200502 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200502 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJASWAMY S/O MARIGEYYASWAMY
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: YARAMASAL VILLAGE,
TQ: DEVADURGA DIST: RAICHUR-584143.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
by KHAJAAMEEN THROUGH DEVADURGA POLICE STATION
L MALAGHAN
Location: HIGH TQ: DEVADURGA DIST: RAICHUR
COURT OF
KARNATAKA ITS REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH
DIST. KALABURAGI - 585107.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, HCGP)
-2-
CRL.P.No.200502 of 2023
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE-SHEET AND
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1833/2022 (CRIME
NO.297/2022, REGISTERED BY DEVADURGA POLICE
STATION) AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE
PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 78 (3) OF KARNATAKA POLICE
ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, DEVADURGA AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner - accused No.2 has been charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 78 (3) of the Karnataka Police Act, alleging that, On 24.11.2022 on receiving credible information the police sub-inspector Devadurga Police Station conducted raid along with the panchas and police constables at Zahiruddin Pasha Circle, wherein the accused No.1 was loudly announcing that one rupee would fetch eighty rupees and he was writing the Matka numbers. On apprehending accused No.1, he -3- CRL.P.No.200502 of 2023 revealed that he was writing Matka numbers on behalf of accused No.2. Police based on the statement of accused No.1, apprehended the accused No.2 and recovered a sum of Rs.1,120/- in cash, and after investigation laid the charge-sheet against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 78 of the Karnataka Police Act.
02. The learned Magistrate, after accepting the charge-sheet, took the cognizance of the aforesaid offence and issued summons, which is impugned in this petition by petitioner - accused No.2.
03. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner - accused No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent - State.
04. The accused No.2 is implicated on the basis of voluntary statement of accused No.1. Section 114 illustration (b) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 specifies that the statement of an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars. In the -4- CRL.P.No.200502 of 2023 absence of any corroborative materials, the charge-sheet laid only on the basis of statement of co-accused i.e., accused No.1, is impermissible.
05. The offence punishable under Section 78 (3) of the Karnataka Police Act, is non-cognizable. On a requisition sent by the police, the learned Magistrate endorsed "permitted".
06. This Court in the case of Vageppa Gurulinga Jangaligi v State of Karnataka, reported in 2019 SCC OnLine Kar 2708, at Para No.20 has held as under :-
"20 The word "permitted" is not an order under Section 155 (2) of Cr.P.C. Guidelines for how to mark an endorsement as "permitted" on a police requisition."
07. In view of the ratio enunciated in the aforesaid case, the word 'permitted' is not an order under Section 155 (2) Cr.P.C. Hence, the registration of the FIR, in the absence of valid order as specified under Section 155 (2) -5- CRL.P.No.200502 of 2023 of Cr.P.C. culminating into taking cognizance of the aforesaid offence by the learned Magistrate stands vitiated. Hence, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following;
ORDER I. The Criminal Petition is allowed.
II. The criminal proceeding in C.C.No.1833/2022 on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, at Devadurga, insofar as it relates to accused No.2, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE KJJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61