Quashed

Sri M L Ashok Kumar v. State by Hebbal Police

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2021CRL.P/1999/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge sheet. The Court set aside the Magistrate's order of taking cognizance, which was described as a stereotyped order failing to reflect application of mind, while clarifying this does not bar further proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 16.07.2019 taking cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC is set aside.

Sri M L Ashok Kumar Vs State by Hebbal Police — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

¶4

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1999 OF 2020

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

Sri M.L.Ashok Kumar Assistant Manager, Karnataka State Warehousing Corporation Division III, Mahalakshmi Layout, Hebbal Kaigarika Pradesha, Mysuru-570018. Aged about 59 years, S/o Late Lingaiah, Presently R/at No.403/A, 13^th Cross, “G” Block, Ramakrishna Nagar, Mysuru-570023.

¶7

…Petitioner

¶8

(By Sri Sandeep S Patil, Advocate)

¶9

AND:

¶10

State by Hebbal Police, Narashimharaja Sub-Division Mysuru-570018 Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560001.

¶11

Sri Siddamahadeviah, Regional Manager, The Karnataka State Worehousing Corporation, Bamboo Bazaar,

:: 2 ::

Sayyaji Rao Road,

Mysuru-570021.

…Respondents

(By Sri B.J.Rohith, HCGP for R1; Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, Advocate for R2)

¶17

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to quash the criminal complaint date 01.02.2017 pending on the file of the Court I Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM Court Mysuru.

¶18

This Criminal Petition coming on for admission through video conferencing this day, the Court made the following:

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Heard Sri Sandeep S Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Learned High Court Government Pleader is also present.

¶21

In this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner has sought quashing of the charge sheet in C.C.No.197/2019 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mysuru, in relation to offences punishable under Sections 406 and 409 of IPC.

¶22

:: 3 ::

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner

¶24

submits that the order of the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences do not reflect application of mind. I have perused the order. It is a stereotype order, which does not reflect application of mind. This is not the way in which the cognizance has to be taken. It is a settled principle that even though the order of the Magistrate is brief, it must reflect that he has applied his mind on the charge sheet materials. Therefore the following.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petition is allowed.

¶27

Order dated 16.07.2019, taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 420 of IPC against the petitioner, by the Magistrate in C.C.No.197/2019 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mysuru, is hereby set-aside.

¶28

:: 4 ::

¶29

However, this order does not come in the way of Magistrate applying his mind and proceeding further in the matter.

¶30

SD/JUDGE

¶31

Kmv/-

Sri M L Ashok Kumar v. State by Hebbal Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M L Ashok Kumar v. State by Hebbal Police

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

Sri Paul D Souza Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Vinodh Kumar N Vs S C Chandrappa

Mohankumar Vs State of Karnataka

M Sowbhagya Vs State of Karnataka

Kadarappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Nandit Jayasimha Vs the State of Karnataka