Petitioner, an advocate, challenged his implication as an accused in a criminal charge-sheet filed against him following a private complaint for cheque-related offences. The Court held that no material existed implicating the petitioner and quashed the proceedings.
The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C.No.838/2019 is hereby quashed.
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 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.26/2021
BETWEEN:
SRI B.R. PRABHAKARA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, SON OF B.S. RAMASASTRY, ADVOCATE, AZAD CHOWK, CHINTAMANI-563 125. … PETITIONER
(BY SRI T. RAJARAM, ADVOCATE FOR SRI RAJAGOPAL T.R., ADVOCATE.)
AND:
… RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.R. SHOWRI, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI B.R. SREENATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET I.E., C.C.NO.838/2019 FILED IN CR.NO.121/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINTAMANI, AS FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to quash the charge-sheet in C.C.No.838/2019 in Crime No.121/2015 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chintamani.
3
4
petitioner, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and the material available on record, the Investigating Officer has not collected any material with regard to the involvement of this petitioner in committing the crime. In the absence of any material before this Court that this petitioner, who is an advocate has indulged in criminal activity, there cannot be any criminal prosecution against the petitioner. The petitioner has discharged his duty by giving opinion and in the opinion also he made the reference with regard to the affidavit given by the party in connection with loss of saguvali chit. When such being the case, when there is no grievance on the part of the bank with regard to furnishing of the opinion, there cannot be any criminal prosecution against the petitioner. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner or otherwise it amounts to miscarriage of justice.
5
following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed.
(ii) The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.C.No.838/2019 is hereby quashed.
Sd/JUDGE
MD
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a criminal prosecution can be maintained against an advocate who filed a legal opinion supporting the bank without specific allegations indicating his involvement in the offence.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri B.R. Prabhakara
State of Karnataka
State Bank of India
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court