Partly allowed

Sri G R Venkateshwara Reddy v. Karnataka Lokayuktha Police

Karnataka HC7 Sept 2016WP/18877/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka was approached via Writ Petition challenging the Special Judge's proceedings. The court quashed further proceedings on the ground that the Special Judge failed to apply his mind to the police report under Section 204 CrPC and directed the Special Judge to take steps in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings pursuant to the filing of the charge sheet by the Police are quashed. The Special Judge is directed to take further steps in accordance with law.

Sri G R Venkateshwara Reddy Vs Karnataka… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 07^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.18877 OF 2016 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Sri. G.R.Venkateshwara Reddy, Son of G. Ramachandra Reddy, Aged about 58 years, Resident of C/o. Sri Ramprasad, Door No.4, Ground Floor, 3^rd Main, 2^nd Cross Left, G.M.Palya, New Thippasandra Post, Bengaluru – 560 075.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(By Shri V. Lakshminarayana, Senior Advocate for Smt. Shilpa Rani, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Karnataka Lokayuktha Police,

¶13

Represented by its Special Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru – 560 001.

¶14

¶15

The Managing Director, KSRTC Central Offices, Transport Bhavan, K.H.Road, Shanthinagar,

¶16

Bengaluru – 560 027.

¶17

Sri. Shanthinath J.Vannur,

¶18

Police Inspector,

¶19

Karnataka Lokayuktha,

¶20

Hemavathi Nagar, Hassan – 573 201. Now Residing at Police Training School, Jyothy Nagar, Mysore – 570 019.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(By Shri Venkatesh P. Dalwai, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 3;

¶23

Smt. H.R.Renuka, Advocate for Respondent No.2)

¶24

¶25

This Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to direct the State Government, R-1 and R2 to constitute a Screening Committee as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a decision reported in 2014 (5) SCC 108 and further direction that the respondents should place the matter before the committee to examine and to find out whether the report is based on a proper investigation or not and etc;

¶26

This Writ Petition coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:

¶27

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

Heard the learned Senior Advocate, Shri

¶30

V.Lakshminarayan appearing for the counsel for the petitioner and Shri Venkatesh P Dalwai, appearing for the respondent –

¶31

Lokayukta.

¶32

One of the grounds on which the present petition is filed is that there is palpable error committed by the Special Judge in proceeding with the case. On receipt of a final report by the Police in terms of Section 190(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Special Judge has failed to apply his mind to the report in proceeding further. In this regard, the learned Senior Advocate would draw attention to Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and would submit that the Magistrate was required to indicate that

¶33

he has applied his mind to the Police Report in taking cognizance of the case and proceeding further. This is significantly absent from the perusal of the order sheet.

¶34

¶35

Therefore, the further proceedings pursuant to the filing of the charge sheet by the Police are quashed. The Special Judge is directed to take further steps in accordance with law. The action taken by him as reflected in the order sheet is not in accordance with law.

¶36

The petition is allowed to that limited extent. The proceedings are quashed in terms as aforesaid. All other contentions are left open.

¶37

Sd/JUDGE

¶38

Sri G R Venkateshwara Reddy v. Karnataka Lokayuktha Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri G R Venkateshwara Reddy v. Karnataka Lokayuktha Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Laila M Iliyas Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Triumph Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr M Venkatesh Murthy

Mr.K.Nandakumar Vs Mr.Nagaraj

Prajwal Vs State of Karnataka

Sri S Jayashankar Vs the State of Karnataka

Syed Iqbal Vs State of Karnataka