Shri. Latifkhan S/O. Ammerkhan Pathan Vs the State of Karnataka

NC: 2025:KHC-D:3399 CRL.P No. 100435 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 100557 of 2025

1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100435 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100557 OF 2025

¶5

IN CRL.P. NO.100435 OF 2025:

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHRI. LATIFKHAN S/O. AMMERKHAN PATHAN AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. SOCIAL WORKER, R/O. KASAI GALLI, BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. S.M.MUCHHANDI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.28 12:29:41 +0530

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE POLICE INSPECTOR MARKET POLICE STATION, DISTRICT. BELAGAVI-590001, R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH-580011.

¶13

(BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA)

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SE. 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN C.C.NO.629/2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II JMFC COURT BELAGAVI AND ALLOW THE PETITION FILED BY THIS PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 BY QUASHING THE CHARGE SHEET AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO. 629/2021 FILED IN MARKET P.S. CRIME NO. 127/2021 U/SEC. 341, 283, 188 OF IPC AND SE. 4(e), 5(1)(4) OF KARNATAKA EPIDEMIC DISEASES ACT 2020 AND SEC.

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC-D:3399 CRL.P No. 100435 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 100557 of 2025

¶17

2 -

¶18

51(b) OF DISASTER MANAGEMENT ACT, AS FAR AS THIS PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED.

¶19

IN CRL.P. NO.100557 OF 2025: BETWEEN:

¶20

SHRI. LATIFKHAN S/O. AMMERKHAN PATHAN AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. SOCIAL WORKER, R/O. KASAIGALLI, BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.

¶21

…PETITIONER

¶22

(BY SRI. S.M.MUCHHANDI, ADVOCATE)

¶23

AND:

¶24

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE POLICE INSPECTOR MARKET POLICE STATION, DISTRICT. BELAGAVI-590001, R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH-580011.

¶25

…RESPONDENT

¶26

(BY SRI. T.HANUMAREDDY, AGA)

¶27

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN CC NO.1288/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II JMFC COURT BELAGAVI, AND ALLOW THE PETITION FILED BY THIS PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 BY QUASHING THE CHARGE SHEET FILED IN MARKET P.S. CRIME NO.35/2022 U/S 283 OF IPC AND SECTION 51(b) OF DISASTER MANAGEMENT ACT, AS FAR AS THIS PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 IS CONCERNED.

¶28

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3399 CRL.P No. 100435 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 100557 of 2025

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The issues involved in these petitions are similar; therefore, they are taken up together, heard, and disposed of by this common order.

¶32

The petitioners/accused have been charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 341, 283, and 188 of the IPC; Sections 4(e) and 5(1)(4) of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act, 2020; and Section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.

¶33

The prosecution alleges that accused No.1 submitted an application seeking permission for canvassing on behalf of a Ward No.1 candidate, and permission was accordingly granted. During the Covid-19 pandemic, when the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) were in effect and the respondent/PSI, along with his staff, was on duty, the petitioners, along with 250 to 300 people, gathered and failed to maintain social distancing, thereby violating the SOP guidelines.

¶34

The issues involved in these petitions were examined by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.100644/2021 and related matters, disposed of on 22.02.2022, wherein this Court ruled as follows:

¶35

“The Division Bench of this Court has clearly held that the State Government has not framed any disaster management plan as mandated under Section 38 of the Act. Without any plan in place, proceeding further under the Disaster Management Act would be erroneous. In light of the observations of the Division Bench, if Section 51(b) is invoked, it becomes unmistakably clear that without establishing what amounts to obstruction under Section 51, the offences cannot be made punishable under Section 51(b) of the Act.

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC-D:3399 CRL.P No. 100435 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 100557 of 2025

¶38

Furthermore, since the rules have not been framed, the Deputy Commissioner had no authority to direct the Tahsildar to register the complaint, as he is not the District Authority as defined under Section 25 of the Act. As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the very order passed by the Deputy Commissioner directing the Tahsildar to register the complaint runs counter to law. The other offences alleged against the petitioners under the provisions of the IPC would also fail in light of the fact that the exercising authority is held to be without jurisdiction. Moreover, there is no act by the petitioners for offences punishable under Section 420 of the IPC or any other invoked provisions.”

¶39

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent–State.

¶40

Section 60 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, specifies that no Court shall take cognizance of an offence under this Act except on a complaint made by the National Authority, the State Authority, the Central Government, the State Government, the District Authority, or any other authority or officer authorized in this behalf by that Authority or Government, as the case may be.

¶41

In the instant case, the returning officer lodged the FIR, and cognizance was taken based on the final report submitted by the police, rather than on a complaint filed by an authority or person as enumerated in Section 60(a) of the Act, 2005. Furthermore, the prosecution has not provided any material to substantiate that the petitioners, who were canvassing/protesting, were infected with Covid-19. In the absence of any material to substantiate that the petitioners were affected by the coronavirus and were likely to spread the infection, cognizance taken of the offence under the provision of the Epidemic Diseases Act is without legal authority.

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3399 CRL.P No. 100435 of 2025 C/W CRL.P No. 100557 of 2025

¶43

Section 195 of the Cr.P.C. states that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the IPC except on the written complaint of the public servant concerned or of another public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. In the instant case, cognizance of the offence under Section 188 of the IPC is taken on the basis of the final report submitted by the police, not on a written complaint from a public servant. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

¶44

Accordingly, the petitions are allowed, and the impugned proceedings in C.C. No.629/2021 and C.C. No.1288/2024, pending on the file of the JMFC-II Court, Belagavi, are hereby quashed.

¶45

Pending applications, if any, are disposed of as not surviving for consideration.

¶46

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶47

JTR Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 139

Shri. Latifkhan S/O. Ammerkhan Pathan v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Latifkhan S/O. Ammerkhan Pathan v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Shivalingappa Alias Shivakumar K. Maigur Vs the State of Karnataka

Bashirahamad S/O. Allabaksha Aralikatti, Vs the State of Karnataka

Imamsab S/O. Maktumsab Gudageri, Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs Vishalakshi Bhat Vs Mr Sunder Rajan M K

Shri. Latifkhan S/O. Ammerkhan Pathan Vs the State of Karnataka

Mrs. Manisha W/O Pundalikrao Kadam Patil Vs the State of Karnataka