Allowed

S. R. Subramanian v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC23 Jan 2017WP/62300/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka summarily allowed writ petitions seeking quashing of proceedings initiated under Section 192A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act due to the absence of a preceding show cause notice, citing Lalitha Shastry vs. State.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were summarily allowed, the pending case and the FIR were quashed. The respondent-State was permitted to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

S. R. Subramanian Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY 2017

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION Nos.62300-62301 of 2016 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

S.R.Subramanian, Son of Ramakrishnan, Aged about 63 years, Former Chief Executive, L&T Construction Equipment Limited, (formerly known as L&T Komatsu Limited) Byatarayanapura, Bellary Road, Bangalore – 560 092.

¶9

R. Venkatesh, Son of U. Rama Madhyastha, Aged about 66 years, Former General Manager, L&T Construction Equipment Limited, (formerly known as L&T Komatsu Limited) Byatarayanapura, Bellary Road, Bangalore – 560 092.

¶10

¶11

…PETITIONERS

¶12

(By Shri Suryanarayana T., Advocate)

¶13

AND:

¶14

The State of Karnataka by

¶15

The Station House Officer, Yelhanka Police Station,

¶16

Bangalore – 560 063.

¶17

The Tahsildar, Bangalore North Taluk, Yelhanka New Town,

¶18

Bangalore – 560 063.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(By Shri Chetan Desai, Government Pleader for Respondents/State)

¶21

¶22

These Writ Petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of The Constitution of India read with Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the complaint dated 17.1.2007 filed by Respondent No.2 to Respondent No.1 at Annexure-A and the impugned FIR No.0012 dated 18.1.2007 filed by first respondent in Crime No.12/2007 before the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru at AnnexureB and etc;

¶23

These Writ Petitions coming on for Orders this day, the court made the following:

¶24

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

It is candidly admitted by the learned Government Pleader that there is no show cause notice preceding the proceedings initiated against the petitioners and therefore the proceedings would be vitiated on that ground alone.

¶27

Since this court in Lalitha Shastry vs. State, ILR 2008 Kar 4520 has laid down the procedure to be followed in invoking Section 192A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, as amended, the petitions are summarily allowed. The case pending in CC 4260/2007 before the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is quashed. However, it is made clear that it would be open for the respondent – State to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law.

¶28

Sd/- JUDGE

¶29

S. R. Subramanian v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. R. Subramanian v. the State of Karnataka

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

Sri. Thippeswamy C.G Vs Sri. Shivaswamy N

Mukkateera Sampath Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Veerabadraiah H C Vs the State by Byatarayanapura P S

Smt. Meenakshi Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Vasunathan Vs the Registrar General

Sri Srinivas Kesineni Vs M/S Religare