Criminal Court quashed an FIR under Section 482 CrPC. It held that the alleged threat did not constitute cheating by personation under Section 66(D) IT Act and that the Section 507 IPC offence is non-cognizable, requiring magistrate permission before FIR registration.
Quashing of the impugned FIR in Crime No.175/2018.
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 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.308 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHIVAKUMAR R., S/O RAJANNA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, PARTNER KUMAR ENTERPRISES, NO.25, 9TH CROSS, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE – 560 020.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. AKASH B SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
... RESPONDENTS
2
(BY SRI. S. VISHWAMURTHY, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. S. SHYAM SUNDAR, SENOIR COUNSEL FOR SRI. SUNIL KUMAR S., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.175/2018 OF HIGH GROUNS POLICE STATION, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 507 OF IPC AND SEC.66(D) OF I.T ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
FIR was lodged by respondent No.2 alleging that on 05.12.2018 at about 8.21 p.m., he received a threatening message from Mobile No.+601121284487 that he will be in trouble or going to be shot dead from the Underworld Don Ravi Pujary, if he insists for recovery of money. The police registered the FIR for the offences punishable under Section 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2008 (for short ‘I.T’ Act) and Section 507 of IPC. Taking exception, to the same this petition is filed.
appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation made in the FIR does not constitute the commission of
3
offence punishable under Section 66(D) of the I.T Act.
He further submits that the offence punishable under Section 507 of IPC is non-cognizable offence and as such, the registration of the FIR without obtaining the prior permission from the learned Magistrate as prescribed under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., is one without authority of law.
appearing for the respondent No.2 submits that the allegations made in the FIR clearly disclose the commission of offence alleged against the petitioner. He further submits that the offence punishable under Section 66(D) of the I.T Act, is cognizable offence as such there is no requirement to obtain prior permission from the learned Magistrate as prescribed under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C.
4
the learned counsel for the parties.
6. To constitute an offence punishable under
Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act, a person by means of any communication device or computer resource cheats by personation, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees. In the present case, the only allegation is that if the respondent No.2 insists recovery of money he would be in trouble and shot dead by an Underworld Don. This allegation does not constitute an offence punishable under Section 66(D) of the I.T Act. Hence, the registration of FIR for the offence punishable under Section 66(D) of the I.T Act, against the petitioner is without any substance.
IPC is a non-cognizable offence. Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., specifies that the police before registering the
FIR for the offence which are non-cognizable is required
5
to obtain prior permission from the learned Magistrate for
registering the FIR. In the present case, the police without obtaining prior permission from the learned Magistrate has registered FIR for the offence punishable under Section 507 of IPC, which is a non-cognizable offence and the same is one without authority of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
(ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.175/2018 registered by the High Grounds Police Station, Bengaluru is hereby quashed.
Sd/JUDGE
GRD
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR registration under Section 66(D) of the IT Act and Section 507 of IPC is maintainable without magistrate's prior permission.
Whether the allegations disclose the offence of cheating by personation under Section 66(D) of the IT Act.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
SHIVAKUMAR R.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
ANIL LAAD
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
