Dismissed

G.K. Basavaraj S/O Guruvappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC26 Feb 2019CRL.P/101962/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings for attempted suicide under Section 482 CrPC. The court held that since the attempt was not in dispute, the petition could not be quashed on grounds of investigation lapses, which are defense matters for trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition to quash the complaint and criminal providence of challan was dismissed.

G.K. Basavaraj S/O Guruvappa Vs the State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101962/2017

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

G.K. BASAVARAJ S/O GURUVAPPA, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: GRADE-I GRAM PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, AT PRESENT F.D.A. AT TALUK PANCHAYATH, KUDLAGI, TALUK: KUDLAGI, DIST: BALARI-583 135.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.GANAPATI M BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, COWLBAZAR P.S., BALLARI, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT BUILDIG, DHARWAD.

¶12

MANJUNATH NAIK, AGE: MAJOR, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, FORT, BALLARI, TQ & DIST: BALLARI.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SRI.A.R.RODRIGUES, AGA FOR R1, SRI.SHIVARAJ HIREMATH, ACDVOCATE FOR R2)

¶15

¶16

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH COMPLAINT DATED 16.04.2013 FIR IN CRIME NO. 142 OF 2013 OF COWLBAZAR P.S. AND CHARGE SHEET AND FURTHER THE ENTIRE PROCEEDIGNS IN CC.NO. 967 OF 2013 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 309 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BALLARI.

¶17

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Though this matter is listed for admission, with the consent of the counsels for both the sides, it is taken up for final disposal and heard the petitioner’s counsel and also the counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

¶20

The factual matrix of the case is that the

¶21

petitioner was suspended on the charge that while he was working as Secretary, Hachcholli Gram Panchayat he had committed forgery in two cheques obtained from

¶22

the Administrative Officer and misappropriated an amount of Rs.1,00,12,000/- and Rs.19,08,000/- and a

¶23

¶24

case has been registered and the petitioner was absconded and after reviewing the said suspension order, the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Ballari has continued the suspension pending disposal of the criminal case vide order dated 17.03.2011 and when the petitioner herein had made representation to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Panchayat, Ballari regarding revocation of his suspension order subject to pending of departmental enquiry by narrating his difficulties and also mentioned that on 16.12.2011 he want to commit suicide with his family in front of Zilla Panchayat Office and once again the petitioner made the representation in view of the non-revocation of suspension order and mentioned as suicide is only an alternative remedy to him and even though lapse of three years, in view of no further order or enquiry the petitioner personally appeared with M.Janjunathy Naik, Chief Executive Officer and made representation

¶25

¶26

regarding revocation of suspension order and specifically mentioned as he along with his family members want to commit suicide. That on 16.04.2013 at about 4.45 p.m. before the PSI-the respondent No.2 herein sent the computerized complaint against the petitioner that by using poison, the petitioner tried to commit suicide with his wife and hence requested to take action against him and based on the same, Crime No.142/2013 registered for the offence under Section 309 of IPC and also after recording the statement of witnesses CWs.1 to 8, filed the charge sheet and the Court below has taken the cognizance for the offence under Section 309 of IPC and hence the present petition is filed seeking an order to quash the complaint dated 16.04.2013 and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.967/2013.

¶27

The main contention of the petitioner that there are no grounds to believe that the petitioner has

¶28

¶29

committed an attempt to commit suicide punishable under Section 309 of IPC and there was no any motive or intention on the part of the petitioner. He further contended that the charge sheet is filed without conducting proper enquiry and in the spot panchanama nowhere discloses recovery of poison bottle as alleged and if there was any recovery of that poison bottle, there is no any report of FSL regarding the seized bottle containing poison and hence the very filing of the charge sheet against the petitioner for the offence under Section 309 of IPC is liable to be quashed. The other contention that the petitioner was under suspension since 08.06.2010 and he made repeated request letters for revocation of suspension order and in spite of the said representations are given no decision was taken and the respondent No.2 lodged the complaint only on the ground that on the same day he made representation and mentioned an attempt is made to

¶30

¶31

commit suicide and the respondent No.2 is solely responsible for the same. The police authority have also failed to recover any poison bottle which is prima facie evidence in the case and hence prayed this Court to quash the proceedings. The petitioner’s counsel in his argument he vehemently contended that the police have not seized the poison bottle and the police have also not conducted proper investigation and based on only the statements of the witnesses a case has been registered and hence the proceedings cannot be continued against the petitioner.

¶32

Per contra, the learned counsel for respondents in his argument contends that an attempt is made to take away his life that too in front of the Officer in the office premises and immediately after the consumption of poison he was sent to the hospital and treatment was provided and no dispute with regard to an attempt is made to commit the suicide and there are

¶33

¶34

material to proceed against him and hence there are no grounds to invoke Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings.

¶35

Having heard the argument of the

¶36

petitioner’s counsel and the respondents’ counsel, this Court has to examine whether this Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶37

6. Having considered the contentions raised by

¶38

the petitioner’s counsel and the respondents’ counsel and on perusal of the complaint, a specific allegation is made in the complaint that he consumed poison and thereafter sent to the hospital and an attempt is made

¶39

to commit suicide by consuming poison and the fact that an attempt is made to commit suicide is not in dispute as rightly contended by the respondents’ counsel and also contention of the petitioner in his argument also that during the course of the

¶40

¶41

investigation, the poison bottle was not seized and there are lapses on the part of the I.O. and the scope of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is very limited and the contention raised by the petitioner’s counsel is a defence and in the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the defence cannot be permitted to quash the proceedings and the petitioner can raise all these during the course of the trial if any lapses on the part of the I.O. and the same may be exposed only during the course of trial and this Court cannot quash the proceedings on the ground that the poison bottle was not seized and only this Court has to see whether an attempt is made to commit suicide and the petitioner is facing the trial and I have already pointed out that an attempt is made to commit suicide that too in the office premises in front of the office of respondent No.2 and when such being the case, all the grounds which are raised in this petition can also be raised during the course of the trial and not at this

¶42

¶43

stage and this Court cannot invoke Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings and only Section 482 of Cr.P.C. scope is if the Court finds that there is an abuse of process and miscarriage of justice then the Court can invoke Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and hence I do

¶44

not find any such circumstances in the case on hand.

¶45

In view of the above discussions, I proceed to

¶46

pass the following:

¶47

ORDER

¶48

The petition is dismissed.

¶49

Sd/JUDGE

¶50

G.K. Basavaraj S/O Guruvappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.K. Basavaraj S/O Guruvappa 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr.Bandenawaz S/O Mohammedhanif Ankali Vs State of Karnataka

Yamanoorappa S/O. Duragappa Hosalli @ Nayak Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.Nagamma Halahalli W/O. Gavisiddappa Vs State of Karnataka

Dr. Shivashekharayya Tigarimath Vs the State of Karnataka

Bhimangouda S/O Venkanagouda Goudar, Vs Nikhil S/O Bhimangouda Goudar

Sri.Mehaboob Sab S/O. Khasimsab Sidhanoor Vs State of Karnataka