Criminal petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of orders of cognizance. The High Court held that the trial court order is revisable under Section 397 Cr.P.C., thus disposal was not necessary.
Petitions disposed with liberty to file revision petitions before the Sessions Judge under Section 397 Cr.P.C.
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 DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
CRL.P.NO.100030 OF 2018
C/W
CRL.P.NO.100053 OF 2018
IN CRL.P.NO.100030 OF 2018
BETWEEN
DHRUVAKUMAR S/O VEERAPPA HOSALLI AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: REVENUE INSPECTOR, R/O: KUNDAGOL, TQ: KUNDAGOL, DIST: DHARWAD.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. R H ANGADI, ADV.,)
AND
-2-
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K UPPAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. PRASHANT KADADEVAR, ADV., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND TO QUASH THE ORDER OF COGNIZANCE DATED 25.10.2017 IN C.C.NO. 382 OF 2017, PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAGOL, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 409, 417, 418, 468, 471, 166(A) READ WITH SECTION 120(B) OF IPC AS AGAINST THIS PETITIONER.
IN CRL.P. NO.100053 OF 2018
BETWEEN
GANESH S/O GURUNATH SAVANUR AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: SHIRASTEDAR, R/O: KUNDAGOL, TQ: KUNDAGOL, DIST: DHARWAD. (BY SRI. R H ANGADI, ADV.,)
...PETITIONER
-3-
AND
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN K UPPAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. PRASHANT KADADEVAR, ADV., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND TO QUASH THE ORDER OF COGNIZANCE DATED 25.10.2017 IN C.C.NO.382 OF 2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNDAGOL, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 409, 417, 418, 468, 471, 166(A) READ WITH SECTION 120(B) OF IPC AS AGAINST THIS PETITIONER.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
ORDER
Pursuant to the direction issued on 27.01.2021, the learned JMFC has forwarded the separate order passed by him on 25.10.2017 taking cognizance for the offences against the petitioners herein.
-5-
petitions before the learned Sessions Judge under Section 397 of Cr.P.C., in which event, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. All contentions are
kept open.
Sd/JUDGE
yan
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order of cognizance for offences punishable under Sections 409 IPC and cognate provisions be quashed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Urmila Devi vs. Yudhvir SinghReferred¶36
(2013) 15 SCC 624 Urmila Devi vs. Yudhvir Singh · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Dhruvakumar
Ganesh
The State of Karnataka
Chandrashekargouda Patil
P. Krishna Bhat
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
