Dismissed

Atul Auto Limtied v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Aug 2021CRL.P/6730/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court dismissed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings. The court held the petition became infructuous due to the investigative agency's inaction beyond the statutory charge-sheet timeline.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous due to delay in investigation and lack of compliance with statutory timelines for charge-sheet.

Atul Auto Limtied Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

CRL.P.6730/2019

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

¶7

CRL.P.No.6730/2019

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

Atul Auto Limited, A company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Anand Raju K., 8-B, National Highway, Near Microwave Tower, Shapar (Veraval), Rajkot District, Gujarat State - 360 024.

¶10

..PETITIONER

¶11

(By Sri Chetan A.C., Adv.)

¶12

AND :

¶13

The State of Karnataka, Represented by SHO, Urva Police Station, Mangaluru - 575 006.

¶14

Vikram K., S/o.Dr.Yajna Narayan, Aged about 44 years, Proprietor, Super Automobiles, Daddalakadu, Ashok Nagar, Mangaluru - 575 006. ..RESPONDENTS

¶15

(By Sri Rahul Rai , HCGP. for R1)

¶16

This criminal petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C praying to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.3/2019

¶17

CRL.P.6730/2019

¶18

¶19

registered in Urva Police Station, Mangaluru and in PCR No.61/2018 which is pending on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM., Mangaluru City, Mangaluru.

¶20

This petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

None appears for the petitioner either physically or through video conferencing. But, learned HCGP for the State is present before court physically.

¶23

This petition is filed seeking quashment of initiation of criminal proceedings in Cr.No.3/2019 registered by Urva Police Station, for the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 IPC arising out of PCR No.61/2018. When once FIR has been recorded by the police having jurisdiction under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C., subsequently the domain is vested with the Investigating Agency to proceed for investigation by following the requisite conditions under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. The Investigating Agency shall record the statement of witnesses and so also secure the material documents and draw the mahazar in the presence of panch witnesses. Similarly, the Investigating

¶24

CRL.P.6730/2019

¶25

¶26

Agency should follow the requisite conditions under Section 167(2)(a)(i) and (ii) relating to the offences maintained in the schedule in the classification that the I.O. has to lay the charge-sheet under the relevant provisions within 90 days or 60 days as regards the offences lugged against the accused in the FIR.

¶27

But in the instant case, the Urva P.S. has registered the case in Cr.No.3/2019 by recording an FIR dated 05.01.2019. Taking into consideration the year of registration of the crime as 2019, it is almost all completion of two and half years. But there is no further progress, by following the requisite conditions of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. either to file a charge-sheet/challan against the accused or file any other report under the relevant provisions of the Cr.P.C., as mandatory. Therefore, this petition does not hold any substance to proceed further seeking quashment of the case in Cr.No.3/2019 registered by Urva P.S.

¶28

CRL.P.6730/2019

¶29

¶30

Consequently, this petition is dismissed as having

¶31

become infructuous.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

Atul Auto Limtied v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Auto Limtied v. the State of Karnataka

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 Ashokrao Jagathap Vs State of Karnataka

Nandita Kumar Vs State of Karnataka

Ganesh Gopal Vs the State of Karnataka

Chikkanna H C Vs Sri. H T Channaiah

Smt. Parvathamma Vs State by Mahadevapura

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of Karnataka