Karnataka High Court
Sharafuddin vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 August, 2023
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:30643
CRL.P No. 2934 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2934 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
SHARAFUDDIN
S/O USMAN K,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT 1-55-1, KEREBALI HOUSE,
BANTWAL TALUK, SIDDAKATTE POST,
D K DISTRICT-574237
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B.LETHIF, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY MANGALURU NORTH POLICE STATION,
D K DISTRICT, REP BY THE S.P.P
Digitally signed by B
K HIGH COURT BUILDING,
MAHENDRAKUMAR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
BANGALORE-560001
KARNATAKA
2. POLICE SUB INSPECTOR
MANGALURU NORTH POLICE STATION,
BANDAR, MANGALURU CITY,
D K DISTRICT-574001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.M.M.WAHIDA, HCGP FOR R1 & R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME
NO.145/2019 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:30643
CRL.P No. 2934 of 2023
153(A), 506, 507, 34, 120(B) OF INDIAN PENAL CODE OF
MANGALURU NORTH POLICE STATION, D.K. DISTRICT,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF JMFC II COURT MANGALURU WHICH
IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is sought to be prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 153(A), 506, 507, 34, 120(B) of IPC.
2. Respondent No.2 lodged the FIR on 24.12.2019 alleging that he received a credible information that in the Facebook account "Idu Namma Dwani" message was circulated on Whats-app Groups, which reads as under:
"¸Á¬Ä¸À¯ÉAzÉà §AzÀ ¸ÀAX ಾ ೕ ೕಸಪ , ಈ ಸಂ ೕ ೇಶ ಾ ೇ ದ ಾತು ಅಲಪ ಇಷು ಗುಂಡು ಾ "ಯೂ %ಾರೂ ಸ'(ಲವಲ ಎಂದು ೇಳ,'(-ಾ./ೆ ಈ ಷಂಡ ೕ ಕ123ೆ "45ದ6ೆ ಯ6ಾ78jæ ೊ9ೆದುರು ", ಇಲ:ದ.6ೆ ಕಲು ಎ;ಾ(4 ಪ7'6ೋಧ ;ೋ ", /ಾ=%ಾಂಗ ವ=ವ ೆ> ಸತು( ೋ?-ೆ. /ಾ=ಯ @ಾನೂನು ಬಂದೂ43ೆ ಾತ7ವಲ ಈ
-ೇಶದ ಪ7Cೆಗೂ ಇ-ೆ ಪ7'6ೋಧ ೇ ನಮE /ಾ=ಯರFಕ ಪ7'6ೋಧ:ಂದGೇ -ೇಶಕಟು ೆವI ರಕ( ಾJಗKಾಗು ೆವI"
The registration of the FIR for the aforesaid offences is impugned in this petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that essential elements to constitute commission of offence under Section 153(A) of IPC are conspicuously absent. Hence, registration of FIR is without any substance. In support, he places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in -3- NC: 2023:KHC:30643 CRL.P No. 2934 of 2023 the case of Patricia Mukhim .vs. State of Meghalaya and others reported in [2021 SCC Online SC 258].
4. On the other hand, the learned HCGP for State submits that the FIR discloses the commission of offences alleged against the petitioner and the veracity of the allegation against the petitioner requires investigation and at this stage, registration of FIR does not warrant any interference.
5. To constitute an offence under Section 153(A) IPC, a person by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, must have promoted or attempted to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional grounds or castes or communities. In the instant case, the allegation made in the FIR does not disclose that the petitioner herein created ill-will or hatred among communities or class of persons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Patricia Mukhim .vs. State of Meghalaya and others(supra) at Paragraph 13 held as follows:
"13. In the instant case, applying the principles laid down by this Court as mentioned above, the question that arises for our consideration is whether the Facebook post dated 04.07.2020 was intentionally made for promoting class/community hatred and has the tendency to provoke enmity between two communities. A close scrutiny of the Facebook post would indicate that the agony of the Appellant was -4- NC: 2023:KHC:30643 CRL.P No. 2934 of 2023 directed against the apathy shown by the Chief Minister of Meghalaya, the Director General of Police and the Dorbar Shnong of the area in not taking any action against the culprits who attacked the non-tribals youngsters. The Appellant referred to the attacks on nontribals in 1979. At the most, the Facebook post can be understood to highlight the discrimination against nontribals in the State of Meghalaya. However, the Appellant made it clear that criminal elements have no community and immediate action has to be taken against persons who had indulged in the brutal attack on non-tribal youngsters playing basketball. The Facebook post read in its entirety pleads for equality of non-tribals in the State of Meghalaya. In our understanding, there was no intention on the part of the Appellant to promote class/community hatred. As there is no attempt made by the Appellant to incite people belonging to a community to indulge in any violence, the basic ingredients of the offence under Sections 153 A and 505(1)(c) have not been made out. Where allegations made in the FIR or the complaint, even if they are taken on their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the FIR is liable to be quashed."
6. The allegation made in the FIR does not satisfy the essential elements to constitute an offence punishable under Section 153A. Hence, continuation of the investigation would be an absence of process of law.
7. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.145/2019 registered by Mangaluru North police station, D.K. -5- NC: 2023:KHC:30643 CRL.P No. 2934 of 2023 District, pending on the file of JMFC II Court, Mangaluru, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73