The Karnataka High Court rejected a petition for quashing criminal proceedings between spouses under IPC sections 454 and 380. The court directed the trial court to expedite the case following SOP guidelines due to the pandemic under Article 21.
Petition rejected; directions issued to expedite trial via SOP.
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 AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2549/2019
BETWEEN:
SRI. G. MAHESHKUMAR S/O SRI. GOVINDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.164, ‘B’ STREET, AR EXTENTION, 6TH CROSS, GANDINAGARA, BENGALURU-560 009. …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V.R.BALARAJ, ADV., APPEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)
AND:
(BY SRI RAHUL RAI K., HCGP FOR R-1 APPEARING THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1734/2018 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.142/2017 IN RESPECT OF THIS PETITIONER PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED IX A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU CITY, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 454 AND 380 OF IPC OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE STATION.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri V.R.Balaraj, learned counsel for the petitioner is appearing through video conference and seeking for some short accommodation to cure the defects which has been noticed by the office. Even though, sufficient time has been given to cure the defects neither the learned counsel for the petitioner nor the petitioner are diligent or vigilant to cure the defects.
physically present before the Court.
3
Crime No.142/2017 is pending before the Court of IX
Addl. CMM, Bangalore city. The Smt. Shashirekha L., is none other than the wife of Sri Maheshkumar who is arraigned as accused No.1, but strangely, there is criminal prosecution initiated and the same is pending between the spouses for the offences punishable under Sections 454 and 380 of IPC relating to the case in Crime No.142/2017.
by the court having jurisdiction. The petitioner has filed a petition under Sections 451 and 457 of Cr.P.C., for interim release of household articles mentioned in
4
P.F.No.5/2017-Sl.No.1 to 66 and the same has been indicated in the order sheet maintained by the court having the jurisdiction.
keeping the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also by referring the material available on record and inclusive of charge sheet made by the Investigation Officer against the accused persons in C.C.No.1734/2019 vide Annexure-B, the accused is facing up of trial for the offences punishable under Sections 454 and 380 of IPC. In the charge sheet, the witnesses have been cited and those witnesses are required to be examined by the prosecution and are also subjected to cross-examination on the part of defence counsel, but the counsel in this matter fairly submits that the petition may be disposed of in terms of expediting the case by giving an opportunity to the prosecution and so also the defence counsel to proceed
5
in accordance with law subject to examination of the
witnesses who have been cited in the charge sheet.
counsel for the petitioner is placed on record.
ORDER
petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is hereby rejected.
(ii) But, keeping in view the submission made
by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is deem it appropriate for the court having the jurisdiction where the case in C.C.No.1734/2018 arising out of Crime No.142/2017 registered by Jnanabharathi Police Station, Bangalore City, is directed to expedite the case by following the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) due to Covid-19 pandemic situation, which is increasing in the Society and keeping in view Article 21 of the
6
Constitution of India i.e., persons life and liberty, it shall be protected not only to the complainant and accused, it is in general as a citizen of this Country.
(iii) Keeping in view Article 21 of the Constitution of India, though, in this matter, directed the Court of IX Addl. CMM, Bangalore City, where the case in C.C.No.1734/2018 is pending for trial for the offences punishable under Sections 454 and 380 of IPC, but the trial Court shall also follow the ‘SOP’ guidelines and to expedite the case in accordance with law.
(ix) Any observation made in this order shall not influence the trial court, even if the offences under Sections 454 and 380 of IPC is lugged against the accused in the charge sheet and shall dispose of the case on merits in accordance with law.
Sd/JUDGE
PB
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Criminal Petition praying for quashing of proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be allowed.
Whether the trial court should be directed to expedite the trial proceedings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri. G. Maheshkumar
State of Karnataka
Smt. Shashirekha L.
K. Somashekar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
