The court dismissed a criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings under Section 188 IPC. The court held that the petitioner's avoidance of summons precludes indulgence and the complaint sufficiently discloses the offence.
Petition dismissed; petitioner directed to appear before Magistrate.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 289 OF 2024 (482)
BETWEEN:
B SRIRAMULU, C/O LATE B THIMMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 47, 1, 47, 65, 35TH WARD, ARUNA GARDENS, SIRUGUPPA MAIN ROAD, HAVAMBHAVI, BELLARY – 583 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GEETHA N. NETTAR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR R P.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by CHETAN B C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY M THIPPESWAMY, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, AKSHARA DASOHA SCHEME, TALUK PANCHAYATH, CHALLAKERE 577 522. R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, COMPLEX, BANGALORE 560 061.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.B JAGADEESH., ADDL SPP)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.481/2023 ARISING OUT OF PCR NO.194/2023 REGISTERED IN C.C.NO.481/2023 ARISING OUT OF PCR NO.194/2023 REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 188 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C COURT CHITRADURGA.
NC: 2024:KHC:7629 CRL.P No. 289 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Petitioner, a former minister in the State
Government is invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of CR.P.C. 1973 for the quashment of criminal proceedings in CC No.481/2023 pending on the file of learned III Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga, for the offence p/u/S 188 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
STATE OF HARYANA VS. C H BHAJAN LAL, AIR 1992
SC 604 . In support of his contention as to what all is required as ingredients to constitute the offence, he presses into service a decision of Calcuta High Court in
HABIBUR RAHAMAN KHAN vs. STATE & OTHERS,
1982 OnLine Cal 51.
and having perused the Petition papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the submission of learned Addl. SPP. Firstly, the Petitioner has not appeared before the leaned Magistrate though the
summons was issued on 05.05.2023, 06.06.2023, 17.07.2023 and lastly on 04.09.2023. Petitioner happens to be a former minister. The contention that summons was not served only leads to the presumption that he is avoiding to be served with the summons. He cannot plead ignorance of the proceedings of the Court below inasmuch as, in this petition he seeks their quashment. It hardly needs to be reiterated that howsoever high one may be, law is above him. In exercising inherent jurisdiction, the conduct of its invoker cannot be ignored.
was lawfully empowered. The order made by the District Election Officer or an Officer on deputation to Election Commission of India answers this description. The application dated 28.04.2023 seeking permission for conducting the public rally at Challakere was turned down vide Endorsement dated 28.04.2023. That itself constitutes an order promulgated by a public servant. If that order is violated, the essential ingredient of Section 188 is complied with. Whether the second part of the provision namely such disobedience causing or tending to cause obstruction, annoyance, injury or risk, need not be in so many words stated to have been present. A bare reading of the complaint dated 29.04.2023 makes the same apparent. Therefore, the decision in HABIBUR RAHAMAN supra could not come to the aid of Petitioner. On the contrary, the Apex Court decision in SAYYED HASAN supra comes to the rescue of the Respondent in view of the observation of Apex Court at paragraph no.6 which reads as under:
… Section 188 IPC does not only cover breach of law and order, the disobedience of which is punishable. Section 188 is attracted even in cases where the act complained of causes or tends to cause danger to human life, health or safety as well…
In the above circumstances, this Petition being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and accordingly it is.
The Petitioner is hereby directed to appear before the learned Magistrate on the next date of hearing, which he should ascertain from the Court below itself on a war
NC: 2024:KHC:7629 CRL.P No. 289 of 2024
footing. Such appearance if not made, the same shall be viewed very seriously and appropriate action may be taken on an application being moved by the State in this regard.
Sd/JUDGE
Snb/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a former minister avoiding court summons justifies quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.
Whether the complaint adequately discloses ingredients of Section 188 IPC for quashing purposes.
Whether the conduct of the invoker of inherent jurisdiction can be ignored in exercising such jurisdiction.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
STATE OF HARYANA VS. C H BHAJAN LALReferred¶21
STATE OF HARYANA VS. C H BHAJAN LAL, AIR 1992 SC 604 · Who else cites this
HABIBUR RAHAMAN KHAN vs. STATE & OTHERSDistinguished¶34
HABIBUR RAHAMAN KHAN vs. STATE & OTHERS, 1982 OnLine Cal 51
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs. SAYYED HASSAN SAYYED SUBHANApplied¶34
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs. SAYYED HASSAN SAYYED SUBHAN (2019) 8 SCC 145 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B SRIRAMULU
STATE OF KARNATAKA
KRISHNA S DIXIT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
