Allowed

Shreenivasa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Aug 2023CRL.P/2451/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court quashed criminal proceedings against petitioners for fake currency offences. The court held that the investigation was vitiated because the police conducted the inquiry without registering the FIR or making an entry regarding credible information in the Station House Diary as required under Section 154 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition allowed; impugned proceedings in S.C.No.5024/2021 quashed insofar as they relate to the petitioners.

Shreenivasa Vs the State of Karnataka — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:27272 CRL.P No. 2451 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2451 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHREENIVASA S/O ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, PRO. MERCHANT OF CLOTHS AND FLOWER R/AT Y.N. HOSKOTE PAVAGADA TUMKUR DISTRICT-41.

¶9

MANJUNATHA S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT M JALAHALLI VILLAGE RAMAPURA HOSURU HOBLI GAWRIBIDANURU TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-08.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY Y.N. HOSKOTE POLICE STATION TUMKURU DISTRICT REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-01.

¶15

POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR Y.N. HOSKOTE POLICE STATION TUMKUR DISTRICT-41.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, HCGP)

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:27272 CRL.P No. 2451 of 2022

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.5024/2021 IN CR.NO.6/2021 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 489-E R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT MADHUGIRI IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Petitioners-accused Nos.2 & 3 who are sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections, 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 489E r/w 34 of IPC is before this Court.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that, on 13.01.2021, on receiving credible information at about 6.00 p.m., that the accused Nos.1 to 2 are in possession of the fake currency notes and were trying to circulate it to the large public, and on receiving such credible information, the Police Sub-Inspector of the Jurisdictional Police Station along with panchas conducted a raid and seized the fake currency notes from the accused Nos.2 and 3 and thereafter arrested them. The cognizance taken of the aforesaid offences is impugned by the petitioners herein in this petition.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondentState.

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:27272 CRL.P No. 2451 of 2022

¶26

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that, the credible information was received at 6.00 p.m. and the Police Officer without registering the FIR at the first instance has conducted a raid which is impermissible as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalitha Kumari -Vs- State of UP , reported in 2014 (2) SCC 1 . He further submits that, the credible information was received at 6.00 p.m., and the FIR was registered at 9.00 p.m. and there is no entry in the Station House Dairy with regard to the credible information so received, hence, conducting of investigation is contrary to Section 154 Cr.P.C. In support, he places reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5689/2018.

¶28

Learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State would submit that, it is not necessary to register the FIR, when the Police Officer receives credible information and to prevent the commission of the crime, the Police Officer without registering the FIR can conduct investigation. In support, she places reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Revision Petition No.538/2014 disposed of on 22.03.2022.

¶29

Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

¶30

Admittedly, the offence alleged against the petitioners are cognizable and the registration of the FIR is mandatory under Section 154 of Cr.P.C. before conducting

¶31

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC:27272 CRL.P No. 2451 of 2022

¶33

investigation, the information discloses the commission of the cognizable offence.

¶34

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.R.P.No.538/2014 has held that registration of the FIR is not necessary, if the Police Officer receives the information, it is the duty of the Police Officer to take immediate measures to prevent the crime from happening, or if committed in his presence. No doubt having regard to exigency, the Police Officer can investigate the cognizable offence without registering the FIR. However, the Police Officer requires to make necessary entry in the Station House Diary of the credible information received that some persons were involved in commission of the crime.

¶35

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.5689/2018, at para 7 has held as follows:

¶36

In fact Sri. Nishith Kumar Shetty, learned Advocate appearing for petitioners is correct in submitting that jurisdictional police had all time at their disposal not only to receive credible information but also had time to secure panchas by issuing notices to them and yet they did not register the FIR. In fact, entry found in the general diary even according to the entries made in the FIR disclose that it was around 7.15 a.m., on 16.2.2018 information had been received and incident is said to have occurred at 3.30 p.m. Thus, the procedure adopted by the jurisdictional police registering the FIR in respect of cognizable offence without entering the gist of the credible information in

¶37

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:27272 CRL.P No. 2451 of 2022

¶38

the General Dairy/Station House Diary, yet, proceeding to the scene of occurrence and apprehending the alleged accused is contrary to Section 154 Cr.P.C. Hence, procedure adopted by the respondent-Police being contrary to Section 154 Cr.P.C., continuation of proceedings against petitioners would definitely be onerous and waste of precious judicial time."

¶39

In the instant case, the Police Officer without making entry in the Station House Dairy with regard to the Commission of the cognizable offence has conducted the investigation, and the same is contrary to Section 154 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the conducting of the investigation without complying with Section 154 of Cr.P.C., culminating in submitting the charge sheet stands vitiated.

¶40

Accordingly, I pass the following order:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

i) Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶43

ii) The impugned proceedings in S.C.No.5024/2021, on the file of the IV Additional District and Session Judge at Madhugiri in so far it relates to petitioners-accused nos.2 & 3 is hereby quashed.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

Shreenivasa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shreenivasa v. the 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

Musthafa Vs State of Karnataka

Anand v Vs State by Ccb (Eow) Bangalore

Yogananda T Vs State by Mandya West Police Mandya

Sri. Manjunatha. P. K. Vs State of Karnataka

Shri. Rajappa. Y Vs State of Karnataka

Sunil Kumar Vs State by Cubbon Park Police Station