The Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition under Articles 226, 226, and 482 Cr.P.C. seeking deletion of Sections 364A and 308 IPC from an FIR. The court held the petition premature pending investigation and noted false allegations could not be contended at this stage.
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 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.9152 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI SHAKTHIVELU S/O NARASIMHAN AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT: No.1109/3 47TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN ROAD JAYANAGAR 5TH BLOCK J.P.NAGAR 1ST PHASE BENGALURU – 560 078.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI TOMY SEBASTIAN, SR.ADVOCATE FOR SMT.MELANI SEBASTIAN, ADVOCATE )
AND:
2
BANASHANKARI 2ND PHASE BENGALURU – 560 070.
ALSO AT
NO.F-201, GEETIKA TOWERS KUNDANBAGH, BEGUMPET HYDERABAD – 500 016.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 POLICE TO SCRAP/REMOVE SECTIONS 364A AND 308 IPC IN THE FIR IN CRIME NO.50/2022 OF J P NAGAR POLICE STATION AT ANNEXURE-A.
THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 09.06.2022, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 1st respondent/Police to delete Sections 364A and 308 of the IPC from the list of offences alleged against the petitioner in the FIR registered in Crime No.50 of 2022.
3
appearing for the petitioner and Smt. K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1.
One Smt. N.Lakshmi, accused No.2 files a complaint against Smt. Neelima Rao, the present complainant in Crime No.49 of 2022 on 02-03-2022. On 05-03-2022 the present complainant registers separate complaint before the very same Police Station in Crime No.50 of 2022 against accused No.1/ petitioner and several others. On registration of the crime, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the aforesaid prayer, on a contention that the offences included in the FIR, which become punishable under Sections 364A and 308 IPC cannot be alleged in the case at hand on a bare reading of the complaint.
widow. Her husband was working as a Scientist in Indian
4
Institute of Chemical Technology and died due to chemical explosion on 18.08.2017. From then, she was residing at Hyderabad and also has a house at Banashankari, Bangalore. The petitioner herein is a nephew of the complainant. The graphic details narrated in the complaint are to the effect that the petitioner confined the complainant in a room and assaulted her. Grave instances of torture are narrated in the complaint. On registration of the complaint, the petitioner files an application seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. That application having been turned down by an order of this Court on 11.04.2022 passed in Crl.P.No.2488 of 2022, the petitioner has presented the subject petition for deletion of offences under Sections 364A and 308 of the IPC from the FIR.
5
which has resulted in bail not being granted, but would submit that if there is no allegation of any offence such offence being added would cause great prejudice to the petitioner.
other hand, would vehemently refute the submissions to contend that the crime is just registered for several offences on the basis of the complaint and as such, it is a matter of investigation and the police coming out with the report. The charge can either be stayed or dropped and, therefore, the petition is premature.
submissions made by the learned senior counsel and the learned High Court Government Pleader and perused the material on record.
6
also taking keys of the house, the car, the ATM card and misappropriating a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. It is on the basis of the said complaint, FIR is registered. It is trite that FIR cannot be accepted to be an encyclopedia of the offence so alleged. On registration of the aforesaid FIR investigation is on.
7
The dismissal of the petition will not come in the way of the
petitioner availing of any remedy available to him in law at an
appropriate time.
Sd/JUDGE
bkp CT:MJ
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the deletion of Sections 364A and 308 IPC from the FIR at the stage of investigation is maintainable.
Whether the writ petition seeking deletion of offences is premature.
Whether rejection of anticipatory bail can support a petition for deletion of charges pending investigation.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Shakthivelu S/o Narasimhan
State of Karnataka
Smt. Neelima Rao
M. Nagaprassanna
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
