Allowed

Radhakrishna v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC13 Sept 2023CRL.P/641/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings against the petitioner for receiving money from a matka game. The court held that reliance solely on the uncorroborated statement of a co-accused without material recovery amounts to an abuse of process of law and thus quashed the proceedings insofar as they relate to the accused.

What did the court decide?

The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.247/2020 insofar as they relate to accused No.2 are quashed.

Radhakrishna Vs State of Karnataka by — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:33640 CRL.P No. 641 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 641 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RADHAKRISHNA, S/O DHARMAPPA NAYAKA, AGED 56 YEARS, R/AT VINAYAKANAGAR, PAVAGADA TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 561 202.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI.MANJUNATH B R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

¶13

PAVAGADA POLICE, REPRESENTED BY

¶14

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001.

¶16

GOAPALA KRISHNA, P.C 736, PAVAGADA POLICE STATION, PAVAGADA – 561 202.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT.K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

¶19

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.247/2020

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:33640 CRL.P No. 641 of 2023

¶21

REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.78(3) OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT REGISTERED BY PAVAGADA POLICE, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT PAVAGADA.

¶22

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

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner/accused No.2 is sought to be prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of the Karnataka Police Act.

¶25

The case of the prosecution is that, on receiving a credible information, the complainant and the staff went to the spot where accused No.1 was playing matka in the public place. The allegation against accused No.2 is that he received money collected from the public from accused No.1.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the absence of any incriminating materials, much less any recovery, the continuation of criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law.

¶27

Learned HCGP for the respondent-State submits that the charge sheet material discloses that the petitioner/accused No.2 received the money from accused No.1 who had collected money from the general public by playing matka. Therefore, the allegation made against accused No.2

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:33640 CRL.P No. 641 of 2023

¶29

discloses the commission of the offence alleged against him and sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶30

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

¶31

Admittedly, accused No.1 was apprehended on the spot when he was allegedly playing matka by collecting money from the public, and on interrogation he has alleged to have stated that the money collected from the public was handed over to accused No.2. Except the confession statement of accused No.1, there is no material much less any recovery from accused No.2, to substantiate the allegation made against the petitioner herein.

¶32

Section-114 Illustration-B of the Indian Evidence Act specifies that the statement of an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particular.

¶33

In the instant case, except the statement of the co-accused, there is no corroborating material in form of recovery to substantiate the allegation against the petitioner/accused No.2.

¶34

Therefore, the continuation of criminal proceedings only on the basis of confession statement of accused No.1 will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶35

ORDER

¶36

i. Criminal petition is allowed.

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC:33640 CRL.P No. 641 of 2023

¶38

¶39

ii. The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.247/2020 on the file of Prl.Civil judge and JMFC, Pavagada insofar it relates to accused No.2 stands quashed.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 93

Radhakrishna v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhakrishna 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

Gilbert Sequera Vs State of Karnataka

Amster Labs Vs State at the Instance the Drugs Inspector

Mr. Mohammed Basheer Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Dhanraj Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

Lohith v Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Vageesh G M Vs the State of Karnataka by Rajajinagar Police Station