Karnataka High Court
Lakshmi Bai Pandith W/O Late Sripad ... vs Sri Mahalingeshwar Dev on 4 April, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE. o4Te Dev OF APRU. 2008 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUST ICR N. ANANDA CRIMINAL PETIVION No. 43/2005 Smt Lakshmi Bai Pandith W/o Late Sripad Pandith © Aged about 8% years Occ: Household: work ~ R/o Bargi, Kuta 7¢.," oe . Uttara Kannada _ a = om ... Petitioner (By Sri Visinu D, Bhat, Advocate) AND: . 'Sri M Mahelingeshwar Dev Sri Ghatabeera Sit Mahygadde Jataga Dev Bargi . By its Trustee and Mokhtesar Venkatraman Ramakrishna Gavankar Aged about 70 years R/o Bargi, Kumta Tq., Uttara Kannada. ... Respondent ~ (By Sri K S Ramesh & Associates, Advocates) This Criminal petition is filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., praying to quash the entire proceedings in PCR No.3/05 on the file of JMFC at Kumta & etc. This petition coming on for final hearing this day, the Court made the following: The petitioner arrayed as aocused j im FOR No. 31 2008, registered for offences punishable under sections 406 & 424 IPC, on the file of Cri Judge or Da} & JMFC at Kumta, has filed this petition to quash proceedings pending therein. 2. TL have beard learned Counsel for petitioner. The earned Counsel for respondent i is absent. ST is Sigma esis petitioner is in possession of certain omaments belonged to Sri Mahalingeshwara, Sri Maha Ganapathi, Sri Mahishasura Mardhini, Sr -- Ginatabeere, 'Sn Mahgadde and Jataga Devaru deities. we " Karlier, father-in-law of petitioner was in the management of above temple. After his death, petitioner came to be in- charge of management of above temple. The properties : - remained im the custody of petitioner. Despite directions issued by the Assistant Charity Commissioner, petitioner refused to handover ornaments, therefore, a complaint was filed against petitioner, alleging aforesaid offences. On Didar trl receipt of complaint, the learned Magistrate passed the -- impugned order, which reads thus:- - "Heard, complainant present, paraded 'the papers reliefs: under 'section. 190 CuP.C. This case is referred-to C. PLU. Kumte for investigation. Under section 156 of | Criminal Procedure Code and . scize the omaments. belongs to deity meutioned i in the complaint Uist in the presence of panchas and report to the Court, but not to | harass any body - send necessary papers to CPI, 5, Kuimita und await." » 4. Tt is. obvious, before { - wey "Complaint, learned woe Magistiate has uot passed a speaking order on the Ba . application 'filed under section 93 Cr.P.C. The learned 7 "Magistrate hag no jurisdiction to refer the complaint to Circle Inspector of Police under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The teamed Magistrate should refer the matter to jurisdictional ; police. Therefore, impugned order cannot be sustained. 5. For these reasons, criminal petition is accepted. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to NW. obre mre, *
its presentation, in the light of obscrvetions made herein and in accordance with law.