Allowed

Smt. Nirmala Naik v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Jan 2017CRL.P/229/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings under Section 186 IPC initiated due to alleged verbal abuse and obstruction of police duty, holding that Section 195 Cr.P.C. barred such initiation without magistrate complaint.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings initiated against the petitioner and pending in C.C.No.13836/2015 before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, stood quashed.

Smt. Nirmala Naik Vs State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.229 OF 2017

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Smt. Nirmala Naik, Wife of Varadaraj Naik, Aged about 54 years, Resident of No.56, B-4, 3^rd Floor, Nitesh Buckingham Apartment, Lavelle Road, Bengaluru – 560 025.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(By Shri Bharath Kumar V., Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

State of Karnataka

¶13

Through Station House Officer, Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru – 560 001. Represented by State Public Prosecutor, Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka,

¶14

¶15

Bengaluru – 560 001.

¶16

Police Constable – 4418, Cubbon Park Police Station, Kasturiba Road, Bengaluru – 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(By Shri B. Visweswaraiah, Government Pleader for Respondent/State)

¶19

¶20

This Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to 1) quash the FIR bearing No.115/2014 dated 16.5.2014 along with the information dated 15.5.2014 registered with the respondent Cubbon Park Police Station for alleged offences under Section 186 of IPC (annexed vide Annexure-A and A1); 2) quash the final report filed by the respondent police in the said matter bearing Crime No.115/2014 currently renumbered as matter bearing C.C.No.13836/2015, for alleged offence under Section 186 of IPC pending on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru (annexed vide Annexure-B). 3) quash the entire proceedings in matter bearing Crime No.115/2014, currently renumbered as matter bearing C.C.No.13836/2015 for alleged offences under Section 186 of IPC pending before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru (annexed vide Annexure –C).

¶21

¶22

This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the court made the following:

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The petition is heard and disposed of at the stage of

¶25

admission, having regard to the facts and circumstances.

¶26

It is alleged that on an information said to have been furnished by Respondent No.2 claiming that on 15.05.2014 when he was on duty and was assigned the task of finding the whereabouts of the husband of the petitioner herein, he had visited the house of the petitioner with an intent to make an enquiry and when he did make an enquiry, the petitioner had verbally abused Respondent No.2 and had obstructed him from discharging his duty. It is pursuant to this information provided that the police had sought permission from the Jurisdictional Magistrate and registered an FIR in terms of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, naming the petitioner as an accused for an offence punishable under Section 186 IPC. It is

¶27

¶28

this procedure which is sought to be questioned in the present petition.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that there is a clear bar under Section 195 Cr.P.C., namely that for any offence alleged under Sections 172 to 188, the person aggrieved must lodge a complaint before the concerned Magistrate and therefore that procedure not having been followed, the proceedings would fall foul under Section 195 Cr.P.C., and hence seeks that the proceedings be quashed.

¶30

The learned Government Pleader would not dispute the legal position as stated by the petitioner.

¶31

Accordingly, the petition is summarily allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner and pending in C.C.No.13836/2015 before the VIII Additional Chief

¶32

Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, stands quashed. However,

¶33

¶34

Respondent No.2 is not precluded from ensuring that

¶35

appropriate proceedings are instituted, in accordance with law.

¶36

I.A.1/2017 is disposed of as a consequence.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Smt. Nirmala Naik v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Nirmala Naik v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Naveen Francis Mascarenhas Vs the State

Levi Strauss (India) Private Limited Vs State of Karnataka

Sri C R Rajendra Babu Vs State by Cbi/Bs & Fc

Prashanth Thami Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Inderjit Ghorpade Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. K.G. Vijayakumari Vs State of Karnataka