Disposed

Shivaraj Tangadagi Ex Mla @ v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Jun 2024CRL.P/5518/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a criminal petition seeking quashment of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court held that litigants should seek discharge from the trial court, directing the trial judge not to insist on personal presence during discharge hearing.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty reserved to seek discharge in Trial Court; Trial Judge directed not to insist on personal presence for discharge application.

Shivaraj Tangadagi Ex Mla @ Vs the State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5518 OF 2024 (482)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHIVARAJ TANGADAGI EX MLA @ SHIVARAJ SANAGAPPA TANGADAGI S/O SANAGAPPA TANGADAGI, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT 92A, KARTAGI, GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL 583 229.

¶9

SITTING MLA AND MINISTER OF BACKWARD CLASS, KANNADA & CULTURE. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SHARANEGOUDA BHAYYAPUR @SHARANGOUDA PATIL S/O ANNADANAGOUDA BHAYYAPUR, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O BAYYAPUR, LINGASUGUR, KHAIRWADGI, RAICHUR 584 125.

¶12

SHARANAPPA PARAKI SHARANAPPA S/O PARASAPPA PARAKI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT UPPAR ONI, WARD NO.1, KARTAGI, GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL- 583 229.

¶13

BASAVARAJ

¶14

S/O AMATEPPA NIRAGANTI AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.66, WARD NO.2, SIDDAPUR, KOPPAL- 583 282.

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶16

VISHWANATHA REDDY HOSAMANI @ VISHWANATH REDDY S/O BUDDANAGOUDA HOSAMANI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.106, 1^ST WARD, NEAR DUGULAMMA TEMPLE, SIDDAPUR, KOPPAL- 583 282.

¶17

REDDY SRINIVAS S/O REDDY VEERARAJU AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT CANAL ROAD, 7^TH WARD, INDRA NAGAR, SRIRAMANAGAR, KOPPAL- 583 282.

¶18

AMBANNA NAYAK @AMBANNA S/O HIREFAKEERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.37, 1^ST WARD, TALAVAR STREET, BENNUR, KOPPAL 583 229.

¶19

PRAKASH BHAVI S/O MAHABALESHWARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT 84, WARD NO. 2, SIDDAPUR, KOPPAL- 583 282.

¶20

SHARANEGOUDA MALI PATIL @SHARANEGODA S/O MAREGOUDA MALI PATIL, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD 1, BUDUGUMPA, KOPPAL 583 229.

¶21

HIREBASAPPA SAJJAN S/O PARAMESHWARAPPA SAJJAN, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD 6, NEAR NAVASHAKTI GYAREJA, KARATGI, KOPPAL- 583 229.

¶22

SHASHIDHARGOUDA @SHASHIDHARA S/O SHIVASIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD NO.8, INDIRA NAGAR, MALLIKARJUNA NILAYA, KARATGI, KOPPAL- 583 229.

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶24

SHIVAREDDI NAYAK @SHIVAREDDY NAYAK S/O BAGAVANTHAPPA NAYAK, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD 2, NAYAK STREET, KARATGI, KOPPAL- 583 229.

¶25

SHARANAPPA KAIGADDI @ SHARANAPPA K, S/O YAMANAPPA K, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD NO 3, KABBERONI, KARATGI, KOPPAL- 583 229.

¶26

RAMESH NAYAK @ RAMESH, S/O MANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD NO. 01, HULIHYDER, KOPPAL- 583 283.

¶27

GADDEPPA NAYAK @ GADDEPPA, S/O BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, RESIDING AT 11^TH WARD, NEAR SHREE DEVI TEMPLE - JP NAGAR, GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL – 583 229.

¶28

SHARANAPPA PANNAPUR @ SHARANAPPA SALONI S/O SIDDAPPA SALONI, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD NO.4, SALONI, KARATGI, KOPPAL- 583 229.

¶29

…PETITIONERS

¶30

(BY SRI. K DIWAKARA., SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HITESH GOWDA B J.,ADVOCATE)

¶31

AND:

¶32

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KARATAGI POLICE STATION, KOPPAL DISTRICT – 583 229. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶35

SANJEEVMURTHY A S/O RANGAPPA SHETTY A, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT NEAR LIC OFFICE, HOSALLI ROAD, GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL 583 227. OCC UNIT OFFICER-KKSRC, GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL.

¶36

…RESPONDENTS

¶37

(BY SRI.B N JAGADEESH.,ADDL SPP FOR R1)

¶38

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS /ACCUSED PERSONS IN C.C.NO.12285/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLII A.C.M.M (SPL.COURT FOR TRIAL OF CASES AGAINST SITTING AS WELL AS FORMER MPs/MLAs TRIABLE MY MAGISTRATE IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA) AT BENGALURU (42ND A.C.M.M) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143,147,341,447 R/W 149 OF IPC ON THE FIR REGISTERED BY KARATAGI P.S. IN CR.NO.224/2022.

¶39

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

¶40

ORDER

¶41

Petitioners are knocking at the doors of this Court

¶42

invoking the inherent jurisdiction for the quashment of CC No.12285/2023 wherein the Charge Sheet has been filed by the jurisdictional Police after investigation. Learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the Petitioners presses into service the Apex Court in STATE OF HARYANA vs.

¶43

CHOWDHARY BHAJAN LAL, AIR 1992 SC 604 for the quashment saying that even if entire charge sheet

¶44

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶45

material is taken into consideration, the charges would not

¶46

be able to be brought to him and therefore the entire proceedings would amount to abuse of process of court and of law.

¶47

Learned Addl. SPP on request accepting notice for both the Respondents vehemently opposes the Petition contending that it is open to the Petitioners to seek discharge under Section 229 of Cr.P.C., 1973 and they can move an Application in that regard, they can await hearing at the hands of the learned trial Judge whilst framing the charge, the Charge Sheet having been already filed; when such an efficacious remedy avails, ordinarily litigants cannot be allowed to tap the inherent jurisdiction of this Court. He also adds that in several other similar matters, this Court has relegated such persons to the trial Court for seeking discharge.

¶48

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶49

and having perused the Petition papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submission made by the

¶50

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶51

learned Addl. SPP on behalf of Respondents. The Apex Court time and again has warned that tapping of inherent jurisdiction u/s 482 of the Code cannot be as a matter of course and that, even if tapped, the jurisdiction shall be sparingly exercised. This Court is flooded with several such matters and in them already the track is beaten by relegating the litigants to the Trial Court with liberty to seek discharge. No special circumstances, despite vehement submissions are demonstrated as to why this Court should leave the beaten track and adopt a different procedure favourable to the litigants herein, no prejudice would be caused to the Petitioners by going back to the trial Judge and seek discharge at his hand inasmuch as, in matters like this, this Court has directed the trial judges not to insist upon personal presence of the accused once the Application is filed for discharge and a final decision after hearing of all the concerned thereon is taken. That would mitigate hardship which otherwise could have occasioned to them.

¶52

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:21255 CRL.P No. 5518 of 2024

¶53

In the above circumstances, this Petition is disposed off reserving liberty to the Petitioners to seek discharge in accordance with law at the hands of Trial Court, keeping open all contentions of the parties.

¶54

The learned trial judge is requested to not to insist upon the personal presence of the petitioners-accused if they apply for discharge and till a decision thereon is taken.

¶55

Ordered accordingly.

¶56

Sd/JUDGE

¶57

Bsv/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Shivaraj Tangadagi Ex Mla @ v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivaraj Tangadagi Ex Mla @ 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K B Krishnamurthy Vs Assistant Commissioner

Sri.K.C. Veerendra Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Canara Minerals Vs Special Investigation Team

Shivaraj Tangadagi Ex Mla @ Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Vedavathi G Vs Abraham T J

Smt. Bhavani Revanna Vs State of Karnataka