Petitioners challenged quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.PC regarding offences including attempt to murder. The court rejected the petition, holding that intention to take life requires trial and the Magistrate applied his mind in issuing summons.
Petition to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.PC rejected.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2021
BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 760/2020
BETWEEN:
2
... PETITIONERS
[BY SRI. SIDDAMALLAPPA P M , ADV. (VC)]
AND:
… RESPONDENTS
[BY SRI. SHOWRI H.R., HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED IN CR. NO. 89/2019 AND C.C. NO. 78/2019 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 307, 324, 504, 506, 447 R/W 149 OF IPC ON THE WRITTEN COMPLAINT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND CHARGE SHEET
3
SUBMITTED AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND THE ORDER DATED 13.12.2019 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC KUNIGAL ORDER TO REGISTERED CRL. CASE AND ISSUANCE OF ACCUSED SUMMONS WITHOUT TAKING COGNIZANCE IN C.C. NO. 78/2019 AS PER ANNEXURE-A BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE PETITION WITH EXEMPLARY COST.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R
Heard the petitioners’ Counsel.
Judge and JMFC, Kunigal, Tumakuru, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 307, 324, 504, 506, 447 read with Section 149 of IPC.
4
injuries are caused to CW.1 to CW.3 and thereafter case was registered and matter was investigated and the Police filed charge sheet. CW.1 to CW.3 are victims and CW.5 is the eye witness to the incident.
5
the mind and hence it requires trial and hence there
cannot be any proceeding under Section 482 of Cr.PC.
the notice of this Court that a detailed order has been passed, when charge sheet is filed, the learned Magistrate has applied his mind and has come to the conclusion that the prosecution papers and material discloses as to commission of offence described above against the accused and hence cognizance taken. The very contention of the petitioners that the learned Magistrate has not applied his judicious mind while issuing process also cannot be accepted.
6
are simple in nature and taking note that the injuries are on the head and in the complaint it is specifically mentioned that intention to take away life an attempt is made. Hence, this Court cannot invoke Section 482 of Cr.PC.
the learned Magistrate has not applied his judicious mind while passing the order cannot be accepted for the reason that having perused the order sheet, the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance passed a detailed
7
order that the Police Sub Inspector, Amruthur Police Station has filed charge sheet for the above offences. He has perused the prosecution papers and also material which discloses commission of offence described in the charge sheet against the accused persons and thereafter registered the crime and after registering the same, issued summons. Having taken note of the order, the learned Magistrate has applied his judicious mind while taking cognizance and he has found material in the charge sheet papers and issued process. No doubt after registration of the CC, an order has been passed issuing summons and there is an order before registration of the CC that material discloses as to commission of offence described in the charge sheet. When the learned Magistrate has applied his judicious mind, the very contention of the petitioners’ Counsel cannot be accepted while taking cognizance, it is not necessary to pass detailed order whether he has applied his mind or not. Having perused the order, the learned Magistrate
8
has come to the conclusion that the material discloses the commission of offence. In view of the discussions
made above, I pass the following order:
ORDER
The petition is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE
AN/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings invoking Section 482 Cr.PC when invocation of Section 307 IPC requires inquiry into intention to take life.
Whether the learned Magistrate applied his mind while taking cognizance by passing a detailed order.
Whether mere allegations of intention to take life in complaints are sufficient to invoke jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
V.M. Srinivasagowda and others
The State of Karnataka
Sri Shivappa
H.P. Sandesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
