This order dismisses a writ petition filed under Article 227 and Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR. The court relied on a prior order passed in a connected writ petition and addressed apprehensions regarding bail and judicial custody.
Writ petitions disposed of by referring to the order passed in W.P.48585/2016.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2016
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
WRIT PETITION Nos.49364-49365 OF 2016 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
…PETITIONERS
(By Shri P. Prasanna Kumar, Advocate)
2
AND:
Karnataka – 560 048.
…RESPONDENTS
(By Shri K.R.Keshav Murthy, State Public Prosecutor-II for Respondent No.1;
Shri G.L.Vishwanath, Advocate for Respondent No.2)
These Writ Petitions filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to call for the records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No.397/2016 dated 17.8.2016 (Annexure-A) and to quash the FIR in 397/2016 dated 17.8.2016 (Annexure-A) as registered by the first respondent.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:
3
O R D E R
This petition is disposed of, in terms of the order passed in W.P.48585/2016 dated 29.09.2016.
out that the first petitioner herein is yet to appear before the court below and seek bail. It is his apprehension that the moment he appears before the court below, he would be taken to judicial custody.
the cases where the court below is not able to take up the application for bail for other reasons, the consideration of the application would be postponed and it is only in serious cases the court may direct the petitioner being taken to judicial custody. It is not expected that the petitioner would be taken to judicial custody in the present case on hand. The court below however, is requested that it may not exercise this power unless
4
the court in its opinion comes to a conclusion that a serious
offence is involved.
With that observation, the petitions stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed under Article 227 and Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR needs to be disposed of in this writ petition or can it be disposed of by a separate order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mr. Sunil Gupta and B. Raju
State of Karnataka
Mr. Lavakumar
ANAND BYRAREDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
