Allowed

Sri D Yathiraju v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Jul 2022CRL.P/4349/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. prayed to quash FIR registered on complaint alleging offences under IPC. Court held private complaint for cognizable offences without complying Sections 154(1) and 154(3) Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Held that remedy for non-registration of FIR or improper investigation lies under Section 154(3) or Section 200 Cr.P.C. allowing impugned FIR to be qu

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition allowed. Impugned FIR registered by Halasurugate Police Station insofar as it relates to accused 1, 2 and 3 is quashed.

Sri D Yathiraju Vs State of Karnataka — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4349/2018

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI D. YATHIRAJU S/O. SRI DASAPPA K., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.57/4, MAKKALA BASAVANNA GUDI BEEDHI, NAGARTHPET, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶9

SRI AYYAPPA S/O. SRI KANNAN, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.46, SUNKALPET MAIN ROAD, CUBBONPET, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶10

SRI J. HANUMAN MURTHY S/O. SRI. V. JAYAPAL, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.46, SUNKALPET MAIN ROAD, CUBBON PET, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI GNANESH N.I., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HALSUR GATE POLICE STATION REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

¶16

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

¶17

SRI. KRISHNA UNNI S/O. P.K. KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.73, 3RD CROSS, CUBBONPET MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶18

SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O. NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONERS, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: HEAD CONSTABLE, HALSOOR GATE POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI ROHITH B.J., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI N. SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; R-3 IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT IN PCR NO.5498/2017, LODGED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AND FIR IN CRIME NO.152/2017 REGISTERED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 427, 341, 448, 323, 324, 506(B) R/W 34 OF IPC, ON THE FILE OF THE I A.C.M.M., BANGALORE.

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

Private complaint was lodged under Section 200 of Cr.P.C.

¶25

for the offence punishable under Section 427, 341, 448, 323, 324, 506(B) r/w 34 of IPC, alleging that petitioners-accused

¶26

¶27

criminally trespassed into the shop belonging to the complainant and tried to assault and also took away some valuable articles belonging to the complainant and damaged the articles worth Rs.35,000/-.

¶28

Learned Magistrate referred the complaint to the Police for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The Police registered the FIR for the aforesaid offence. Taking exception of the same, this petition is filed.

¶29

I have examined the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶30

The aforesaid offences alleged against the

¶31

petitioners-accused are cognizable and the private complaint was filed without complying sections 154 (1) and 154 (3) of Cr.P.C. which is mandatory as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 at para 27 and is as follows:

¶32

"27. As we have already observed above, the Magistrate has very wide powers to direct registration of an FIR and to ensure a proper investigation and for this purpose he can monitor the

¶33

¶34

investigation to ensure that the investigation is done properly (though he cannot investigate himself). The High Court should discourage the practice of filing a writ petition or petition under Section 482 CrPC simply because a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or after being registered, proper investigation has not been done by the police. For this grievance, the remedy lies under Sections 36 and 154(3) before the police officers concerned, and if that is of no avail, under Section 156(3) CrPC before the Magistrate or by filing a criminal complaint under Section 200 CrPC and not by filing a writ petition or a petition under Section 482 Cr.PC."

¶35

In view of the preceding analysis, I am of the considered view that the private complaint filed for the aforesaid offence which are cognizable without complying sections 154 (1)

¶36

and 154 (3) of Cr.P.C. is held to be not maintainable.

¶37

Accordingly, I pass the following

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i) Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶40

ii) Impugned FIR in Crime No.152/2017 registered by

¶41

the Halasurugate Police Station, Bangalore, insofar it relates to accused No.1,2 and 3 is hereby quashed.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

HR

Sri D Yathiraju v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri D Yathiraju v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K.A. Lingaraju Vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

A K Ramaprakash Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Sri E Amarnath Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Mohammed Nisham @ Nisham Vs State of Karnataka

Sri D Yathiraju Vs State of Karnataka

Sri D Yathiraju Vs State of Karnataka