The court dismissed a Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIRs as the petition had become infructuous due to the lapse of the statutory period for filing a charge sheet.
Petition dismissed as having rendered infructuous on the grounds of delay in filing the charge sheet.
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 06TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7104/2019
BETWEEN:
LAKSHMINARAYANA C S/O. CHIKKANNA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/O. NO.36, 13TH 'A' CROSS SIDDAPPA GARDEN GANAPATHIPURA BANGALORE - 560 062.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI SWAMINATH A, ADV.)
AND:
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CR.NO.127/2019 AND CIS NO.696/2019 AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER PENDING ON THE FILE OF VII-ACMM, BENGALURU.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Sri. Swaminath A, learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned HCGP for respondent No.2/State are present before the Court physically.
3
In this petition, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made an observation holding that the practice and also express hope that the advocates accepting such last minutes briefs should eschew from doing so, which is nothing but trying to circumvent the proceedings before the court. This case is come in the classification of concept of circumvent the proceedings, where the counsel for petitioner who is on record is intended to file retirement memo.
Whereas, under this petition, the petitioner is seeking to quash the case in Cr.No.127/2019 and CIS No.696/2019 registered by Mahalakshmipuram Police Station, Bengaluru city registered on 30.05.2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 363 of IPC1860, which is pending before the Court of 7th ACMM, Bengaluru.
One Smt. Lakshmidevi, is the complainant and based on her complaint, respondent No.1 filed the FIR in Cr.No.127/2019 and investigating agency has taken up the matter for investigation. The crime was of the year 2019 and
4
almost 02 years has been completed after filing FIR and moreover Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. provides that when once the FIR is registered under Section 154 of Cr.P.C., it is the domain vested with investigating agency to proceed with the case for investigation and during the investigation, it requires to record statement of witnesses and so also collect material documents in order to proceed further in the case in accordance with law to file charge sheet. Under Section 167(2)(a)(i) and (ii) of Cr.P.C., relating to the offences disclosed in the FIR, investigation has to be completed and chargesheet has to be laid within a period of 60 days or 90 days the court having a jurisdiction to proceed in further in accordance with law.
Therefore, keeping in view the aforesaid mandatory
provision, it is deem it appropriate to dismiss this petition as having become infructuous.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as having rendered infructuous.
5
However, Sri. Swaminathan A., learned counsel who is present physically before this court is directed to file his memo of retirement in the filing counter for the purpose of
reference.
Sd/JUDGE
HJ
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Criminal Petition No.7104/2019 deserves to be allowed in view of the delay in filing the charge sheet.
Whether the petition is rendered infructuous due to the lapsing of the limitation period for filing the charge sheet under Sections 167(2) of Cr.P.C.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
Lakshminarayana
State of Karnataka
Lakshmidevi
K. Somashekar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
