Allowed

Channappa v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Mar 2024CRL.P/5313/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Complainant challenged a Magistrate's order accepting the police 'B' report in an abetment-of-suicide FIR without notice to him. The High Court quashed the order, holding the complainant must be given opportunity to file a Protest Memo, and allowed four weeks to do so.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 08-09-2014 accepting 'B' report quashed; petitioner granted time till 16-04-2024 to file Protest Memo.

Channappa Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:9440 CRL.P No. 5313 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5313 OF 2018

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

CHANNAPPA S/O DODDABAJJAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING AT R NULENUR RAMAGIRI HOBLI, HOLALKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 526.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI RUDRAPPA P, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOPPA POLICE STATION, MADDUR TLAUK MANDYA DISTRICT

¶12

Digitally signed by NARAYANAPPA LAKSHMAMMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶14

DHANALAKSHMI

¶15

W/O LATE PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT KARIGOWDANA KOPPALU KOWDLEY MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571428

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI M.R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1)

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:9440 CRL.P No. 5313 of 2018

¶19

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C. PLEASED TO QUASH THE ORDER IN CR.NO.22/2014 DATED 08.09.2014 PASSED BY THE CJ AND JMFC, MADDUR AND TO DIRECT THE CJ AND JMFC, MADDUR TO GIVE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO FILE THE PROTEST MEMO AND TO CONTEST THE CASE IN CR.NO.22/2014 IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶20

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

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶23

"a) quash the order in Crime No.22/2014 dated 08.09.2014 passed by the CJ and JMFC, Maddur,

¶24

b) Direct the CJ & JMFC, Maddur to give opportunity to the petitioner to file the Protest memo and to contest the case in Crime No.22/2014 in accordance with law, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶25

The FIR in Crime No.22/2014 had been registered by the Koppa Police Station, Maddur Taluk, Mandya District, on the basis of the complaint filed by the petitioner and on investigation being completed, 'B' report came to be filed. The Magistrate recording

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:9440 CRL.P No. 5313 of 2018

¶27

that notice had been issued to the petitioner and the petitioner being absent, 'B' report was accepted by the impugned order dated 08-09-2014. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that copy of the 'B' report was never furnished by the Investigating Officer to the petitioner nor was the notice served on the petitioner. If the petitioner had been served, the petitioner would have filed a Protest Memo to the same. It is for that reason, the petitioner is before this Court challenging the aforesaid order seeking permission to file Protest Memo.

¶29

An allegation in the present FIR being a serious one under Section 306 of IPC, I have to concur with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. If notice has been served on him, petitioner would have taken adequate steps. Since

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:9440 CRL.P No. 5313 of 2018

¶32

he came to know about the disposal of the said proceedings, he has filed this petition.

¶33

Whenever, 'B' report is filed, an opportunity should be granted to the complainant to file Protest Memo. The petitioner having deprived the opportunity, I am of the opinion that, the petition is liable to be allowed. Hence, I pass the following:

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) Criminal petition is allowed.

¶36

(ii) The order dated 08-09-2014 passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Maddur, in Crime No.22/2014 is quashed.

¶37

(iii) The petitioner is granted four weeks time

¶38

to file his Protest Memo which shall be filed on or before 16^th April 2024, which shall be considered by the trial Court on merits.

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC:9440 CRL.P No. 5313 of 2018

¶41

(iv) It is made clear that this Court had not

¶42

expressed any opinion on the merits of the 'B' report

¶43

on the Protest Memo to be filed.

¶44

Sd/JUDGE

¶45

tsn* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63

Channappa v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Channappa 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yashaswini Vs Cbse Board

R Singaram Vs Karnataka State Law University

Sri Krishnarajendra Charitable Trust'S Vs the Union of India

Velishala Murahari Vs Muddaveerappa

Natekal Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Thejaswini @ Vs State of Karnataka by