Allowed

Santhosh B P v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC26 Oct 2023CRL.P/3081/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed two petitions (Criminal Petition No. 3081/2022 and Writ Petition No. 11601/2023) filed by individuals accused of assaulting a police constable and abusing caste identity. Based on a compromise filed by the de facto complainants, the court quashed the implicated FIRs and criminal proceedings as an abuse of the process of law.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal petitions were allowed, and the impugned FIR and proceedings in the Special Court within the Sessions Court were quashed.

Santhosh B P Vs State of Karnataka by — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3081 OF 2022 C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 11601 OF 2023 (GM-RES)

¶7

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3081 OF 2022:

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SANTHOSH B P

¶10

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

¶11

S/O LATE PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS OCCUPATION: PSI IN KOTA POLICE STATION UDUPI DISTRICT NOW WORKING AS PSI IN SP OFFICE, MANGALURU NOW R/AT NO.417.1, BOTTAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, TALAKADU HOBALI, T. NARASIPURA TALUK MYSORE-571122.

¶12

RAMANNA @ RAMA DEVADIGA S/O LATE NAGA DEVADIGA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS OCCUPATION: H C.1876 IN KOTA POLICE STATION UDUPI DISTRICT NOW R/AT HALE NAYAKARA MANE BADA BIYARA, KUNDAPURA TALUK BYNDOOR POST, UDUPI DISTRICT-576214.

¶13

ASHOK SHETTY S/O BABU SHETTY

¶14

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶15

AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS OCCUPATION: H.C. 50 IN KOTA POLICE STATION, UDUPI DISTRICT NOW R/AT THONDLE, PADUVARY VILLAGE BYNDOOR POST AND TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576 214.

¶16

MANJUNATHA S/O SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS OCCUPATION: P.C.NO.2598 IN KOTA POLICE STATION UDUPI DISTRICT NOW R/AT KANDALI POST NO.42, ANNACHI HALLI VILLAGE, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 217. (BY SRI. KARIAPPA N.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NASIR ALI, ADVOCATE)

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

AND:

¶19

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOTA POLICE STATION, BRAMHAVARA CIRCLE UDUPI DISTRICT-576 213

¶20

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CID-POLICE BANGALORE-560066 (BOTH R1 AND R2 ARE REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)

¶21

RAJESH S/O GANAPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT KOTATHATTU, KOTA UDUPI TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576 213. …RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. THEJESH P., HCGP FOR R1 & R2;

¶23

¶24

NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶25

SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

¶26

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.214/2021 OF KOTA POLICE STATION, BRAMAHAVAR CIRCLE, UDUPI DISTRICT, FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTION 3(2)(VA) OF SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT 1989, PENDING IN ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, KUNDAPURA, UDUPI AND ALSO INVESTIGATION, AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF OR RELIEFS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.

¶27

IN WRIT PETITION NO. 11601 OF 2023:

¶28

BETWEEN:

¶29

MR. RAJESH S/O GANAPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/A CHITTIBETTU KOTATHATTU VILLAGE, KOTA POST BRAMHAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶30

MR. SUDARSHAN S/O LATE SHEKHARA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT CHITTIBETTU KOTATHATTU VILLAGE, KOTA POST BRAMHAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶31

MR. GANESH BARKOOR S/O TEJA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT HERADI VILLAGE, RANGANAKERE, BARAKOORU POST, BRAMHAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶32

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶33

MR. SACHIN S/O GOPAL AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS DHARALENI GUDDE, KONKINADA VILLAGE, BYNDUR TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576214.

¶34

MR. GIRISH S/O GANAPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/A CHITTIBETTU KOTATHATTU VILLAGE, KOTA POST, BRAMHAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶35

MR. NAGENDRA PUTHRAN @ NAGENDRA S/O KRISHNA BANGERA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/A "AMMA NILAYA" GOBBARABETTU KOTA KOTATHATTU VILLAGE, KOTA POST, BRAMHAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶36

MR. NAGARJ PUTHRAN S/O KRISHNA BANGERA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS "AMMA NILAYA" GOBBARABETTU KOTA KOTATHATTU VILLAGE, KOTA POST, BRAMHAVARA ATALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶37

MR. PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O LATE ANADA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS KUNJALU, JANTARU VILLAGE AND POST, BRAMHAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶38

…PETITIONERS

¶39

(BY SRI. SANTOSH B.M., ADVOCATE)

¶40

¶41

NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶42

AND:

¶43

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOTA POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001.

¶44

MR. JAYARAMA NAIKA S/O LOKA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/A KOTA POLICE QUARTERS KOTA, BRAHMAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576213.

¶45

…RESPONDENTS

¶46

(BY SRI. THEJESH P., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. JAYARAMA NAIKA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶47

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEXURE-C CHARGE SHEET DATED 16.08.2022 FILED BY THE R1-POLICE IN SPECIAL C.C.NO.512/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, UDUPI (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA) KUNDAPURA FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 341, 353, 332, 323 R/W 149 AND 188 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTION 3(1) (r), 3(2)(v-a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989.

¶48

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶49

ORDER

¶50

Since issues involved in these petitions are similar they are taken up together, heard and disposed of by the common order.

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶53

In Crl.P.No.3081/2022

¶54

This petition is filed challenging the FIR in Crime No.214/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 alleging that the accused herein assaulted and abused the complainant with reference to his caste. The alleged incident had taken place on 27.12.2021

¶55

In W.P.No.11601/2023

¶56

3. The registration of the FIR for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 353, 332, 323 r/w 149 and 188 of IPC and section 3(1) (r), 3(2) (v-a) of SC/ST (POA) Act 1989. is impugned in this petition.

¶57

4. The 2^nd respondent lodged the FIR alleging that the petitioners accused herein assaulted and abused the complainant with reference to his caste.

¶58

The Police after investigation submitted the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 353, 332, 323 r/w 149 and 188 of IPC and under Section 3(1) (r) 3(2) (v-a) of SC-ST(POA) Act, 1989.

¶59

The case of the prosecution is that, on 27.12.2021 when the accused were playing loud music without permission, at that time, the informant and the Head constable requested them to reduce the volume since the mother of the informant is the heart patient, but accused did not accede to their request

¶60

¶61

NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶62

and tried to assault the Police constable and also abused the informant with reference to his caste.

¶63

The parties are present before this Court. The Defacto complainants have filed an application under Section 320 r/w 482 of Cr.P.C., stating that they have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves and to maintain a cordial relationship they have no objections for quashing the impugned proceedings.

¶64

The applications are placed on record.

¶65

Perusal of the applications indicates that the incident had taken place in the spur of the movement and there was no intention on the part of the accused to abuse and assault the Police personnel when they were on duty. The parties have amicably resolved their dispute among themselves and they have no objections for quashing the impugned proceedings. It would be a futile exercise, if the petitionersaccused are subjected to investigation/trial, since the probability of their conviction is remote and bleak, in view of the settlement.

¶66

Therefore, the continuation of the investigation/criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶67

ORDER

¶68

i) The Criminal petitions are allowed;

¶69

ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.214/2021 registered by the Kota Police Station and the impugned

¶70

NC: 2023:KHC:38065 CRL.P No. 3081 of 2022 C/W WP No. 11601 of 2023

¶71

¶72

proceedings in Spl.C.No.512/2022, on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Udupi (Sitting at Kundapura) Kundapura are hereby quashed.

¶73

iii) In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A. No.2/2023 filed in Crl.P.No.3081/2022 does not survive for consideration and stands disposed of.

¶74

Sd/JUDGE

¶75

Santhosh B P v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh B P v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Thimmanna T Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Abdul Sattar Vs Sri K K Mathew

Smt. Maheen Zafar Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri G E Veerabhadrappa Vs Directorate of Enforcement

Sri Ashok Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ashok Reddy K N Vs State of Karnataka