Allowed

Jayakrishnegowda P K v. State by Kikkeri Police Station

Karnataka HC31 Oct 2023CRL.P/3873/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed two criminal petitions filed under Section 482 CrPC. The court quashed proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.3396/2021 and Spl.C.No.250/2021, finding specific allegations lacking and the petitioner ought to have been falsely implicated.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petitions allowed; impugned proceedings in C.C.No.3396/2021 and Spl.C.No.250/2021 quashed insofar as they relate to the petitioner.

Jayakrishnegowda P K Vs State by Kikkeri Police Station — Caste Atrocities | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:39041 CRL.P No. 3873 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 3849 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31^ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3873 OF 2022

¶6

C/W

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3849 OF 2022

¶8

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3873 OF 2022:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

JAYAKRISHNEGOWDA P K S/O LATE KALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT, PURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HIRIKALALE POST, K.R.PET TALUK, MANDYA- 571 426.

¶11

NOW R/AT NO.9, 1ST MAIN 1ST CROSS, E AND F BLOCK, UDAYARAVI ROAD, NEAR SHANTISAGAR HOTEL, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE-570 022.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

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

¶14

(BY SRI. L M CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE BY KIKKERI POLICE STATION, MYSORE DISTRICT-571 423, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR.

¶17

SMT LAKSHMAMMA, W/O LATE KEMPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT TALUKU OFFICE ROAD, K R PET TOWN AND TALUK, MANDYA-571 423.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. VENKATSATYANARAYAN A, ADVOCATE)

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:39041 CRL.P No. 3873 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 3849 of 2022

¶21

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.3396/2021 FROM THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C, KRISHNARAJPETE, MANDYA FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 447, 324, 506, 354 IN CRIME NO.131/2021 FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE i.e KEKKERI POLICE AND ETC.

¶22

IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3849 OF 2022:

¶23

BETWEEN:

¶24

JAYAKRISHNEGOWDA P K S/O LATE KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT PURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HIRIKALALE POST, K.R.PET TALUK, MANDYA-571 426.

¶25

NOW R/AT NO.9, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, E AND F BLOCK UDAYARAVI ROAD, NEAR SHANTISAGAR HOSTEL, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, MYSORE-570 022.

¶26

…PETITIONER

¶27

(BY SRI. L M CHIDANANDAYYA, ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

STATE BY KIKKERI POLICE STATION MYSORE DISTRICT-571 423 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶30

SRI VASANTHA KUMARA, S/O DYAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RA/T CHIKKOSAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, K R PET TALUK, MANDYA-571 423.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. VENKATSATYANARAYAN A, ADVOCATE)

¶33

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDING INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN SPL.C.NO.250/2021 FROM THE FILE OF THE V ADDL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MANDYA FOR THE OFFNECE P/U/S 143, 147, 504, 323, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r),(s), OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE i.e KEKKERI POLICE AND ETC.

¶34

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:39041 CRL.P No. 3873 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 3849 of 2022

¶35

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

¶36

ORDER

¶37

The petitioner who is common in both the petitions is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 504, 323, 447, 427, 324, 506, 354 r/w 149 of IPC, and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(f) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶38

IN CRL.P.NO. 3873/2022:

¶39

The summary of the charge sheet is that when the defacto-complainant was working in the land belonging to the petitioner's brother, at that time, the petitioner and other accused trespassed and assaulted with sticks and tried to outrage modesty of the defacto-complainant, at that time, one Harish and Vasanth Kumar who were cultivating the land in the adjacent land came to her rescue. Thereafter, the accused went away by threatening that they would do away with their life.

¶40

IN CRL.P.NO. 3849/2022

¶41

The case of the prosecution is that, on 17.7.2021, when C.W.4 and 6 were working in the land bearing Sy.No.75, accused Nos.1 to 7 in the backdrop of a dispute with the father of the C.W.5 and 6 by forming an unlawful assembly came to the land and picked up the quarrel with C.W.4 and 6 and when C.W.1 tried to pacify the quarrel, at that time, accused No.1

¶42

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:39041 CRL.P No. 3873 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 3849 of 2022

¶43

abused him by referring to his caste. Accused Nos.3, 4, 5 and 6 assaulted C.W.1 with their hands.

¶44

Respondent No.2 in both the petitions though served with notice have not chosen to appear in person or through their counsel.

¶45

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent-State.

¶46

Perusal of the charge sheet material indicates that, except omnibus and general allegations, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner herein as to how and in what manner he assaulted the injured witnesses or abused the complainant or his witnesses.

¶47

The petitioner has produced the discharge summary issued by Suyog Hospital, Mysuru dated 18.07.2021 to establish that the petitioner was not present on the spot but he was undergoing treatment in the said hospital for his right Lower Lobe Pneumonia. The said document is not disputed or controverted by respondent No.2 or by the State by filing the objections, and in the absence of the same, it is inferred that the petitioner was not present on the spot, and he was undergoing treatment for his right lower lobe Pneumonia in Suyog Hospital as on the date of the incident.

¶48

Hence, the allegation that the petitioner along with other accused assaulted and abused the complainant and his witnesses is without any substance, and the petitioner has been

¶49

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:39041 CRL.P No. 3873 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 3849 of 2022

¶50

falsely implicated on the premise that the petitioner had instigated one Cheluvaiah alleged to be his employee to lodge the FIR against Chetan and others in Crime No.129/2021. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

i) The criminal petitions are allowed;

¶53

ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.3396/2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Krishnarajpete, Mandya, and the impugned proceedings in Spl.C.No.250/2021, on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mandya, insofar it relates to the petitioner in both the petitions stands quashed.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

Jayakrishnegowda P K v. State by Kikkeri Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayakrishnegowda P K v. State by Kikkeri Police Station

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

Ravichandran Selvaraj Vs State of Karnataka by

Rathnappa Vs State of Karnataka

T Appannagowda Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. M Goutham Chand Vs State of Karnataka by

Surekha Devi H @ Rekha Vs State of Karnataka

Varun Suvarna Vs State of Karnataka