Allowed

Ms Jaikiran v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Oct 2020CRL.P/4866/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner sought to quash an FIR impersonating government officials. The court held that the investigating Magistrate failed to apply his mind while permitting the investigation under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Consequently, the High Court quashed the proceedings allowing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings in Crime No.122/2020 and the investigation under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. were quashed as the Magistrate failed to apply his mind.

Ms Jaikiran Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2020)

¶1

CRL.P. No.4866 OF 2020

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2020

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4866 OF 2020

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

MS. JAIKIRAN D/O KESHAVAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS OCC: CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN & CHILD & SENIOR CITIZEN, DISABLE DEVELOPMENT HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-01 R/AT NO.212, HOYSALA NAGAR MAIN ROAD BEERANAHALLI KERE, HASSAN-573201 ... PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SAKALESHPURA RURAL POLICE STATION HASSAN DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-01

¶13

DEELIP K.G CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER SAKALESHPURA TALUK SAKALESHPURA HASSAN DISTRICT-01 ... RESPONDENTS

¶14

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP FOR R1)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C,. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN

¶16

CRL.P. No.4866 OF 2020

¶17

¶18

CR.NO.122/2020 FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 505, 120-B OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC AT SAKALESHPURA AND REGISTERED BY SAKALESHPURA RURAL POLICE.

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Smt.Rashmi Jadhav, learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.2

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for quashing of Crime No.122/2020 registered for offences under Section 505, 120B of IPC pending on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sakaleshpura.

¶23

The respondent-police have registered a complaint

¶24

on the basis of information received from one Rekha, Anganwadi worker that she received a phone call from certain mobile numbers wherein she alleged that he is calling from Food Commissioner's office enquiring about the food supplies to the Anganwadi. Suspecting the said

¶25

CRL.P. No.4866 OF 2020

¶26

¶27

call, said Rekha lodged a complaint with respondent No.2, who is the Child Development Project Officer, who in turn filed a complaint with the Commissioner's office as regards impersonation and fake phone call. The said FIR came to be registered as Crime No.122/2020 and being non-cognizable in nature, permission was sought from the jurisdictional Magistrate.

¶28

The jurisdiction Magistrate in his order dated 19.8.2020 endorsed "permitted" on the said requisition and permitted the respondent No.1– police to investigate.

¶29

This according to Sri.Pratheep, learned counsel for the petitioenr is contrary to the law laid down by this Court on several occasions. The Magistrate has not applied his mind nor passed a reasoned order permitting the investigation. Therefore, he submits that the proceedings are required to be quashed.

¶30

CRL.P. No.4866 OF 2020

¶31

¶32

Per contra, Smt.Rashmi Jadhav, learned HCGP would submit that Magistrate by endorsing the word 'permitted' has discharged his duties and thereafter respondent No.1 has taken up the investigation.

¶33

Having heard both the counsels, I am of the considered opinion that the Magistrate is required to apply his mind and pass orders in terms of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C after appreciating the allegations made. This Court in catena of Judgments in the case of A.H.Vishwanath –vThe State of Karnataka (Crl.P. No.4954/2014 DD 14.3.2019), Mr.Ibrahim Kaleelulla –v- The State of Karnataka (W.P.No.27649/2019 DD 31.07.2019)and Sri.Munirathna –v- State of Karnataka (Crl.P. No.4035/2019 DD 7.01.2020) has laid down the manner in which the Magistrate has to deal with such requisitions. In the present case the Magistrate not having dealt with in the required manner, the proceedings in

¶34

CRL.P. No.4866 OF 2020

¶35

¶36

Crime No.122/2020 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and JMFC, Sakaleshpura is quashed.

¶37

The petition is accordingly allowed.

¶38

Sd/JUDGE

¶39