Disposed¶27

D S Venkatesh v. Bhanumathi D v

Karnataka HC4 Mar 2025CRL.P/11768/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. for offences under Sections 182, 195, 211 IPC barred by Section 195(1)(a)(i)/(b)(i) Cr.P.C.; dismissal for non-prosecution; P.C.R. No.222/2024 (prayer cites PCR 222/2023), Civil Judge & JMFC Kushalnagar; order dated 20/09/2024 challenged; petition disposed with liberty to approach appropriate forum under Section 195 Cr.P.C.; Karnataka HC, Justice Hemant Chandangoudar, 4 March 2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum under Section 195 of the Cr.P.C.; the impugned order dated 20/09/2024 was not set aside and the complaint was not restored. ¶27

D S Venkatesh Vs Bhanumathi D v — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:9100 CRL.P. No.11768/2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.11768/2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

D.S. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O SRI. D.C. SHIVANNA LIC AGENT R/O. MULLUSOGE VILLAGE, KUSHALNAGAR TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

(BY SRI. HANUMESH H.N. ADV., FOR SRI. RAJATH, ADV.,)

¶11

AND:

¶12

BHANUMATHI D.V. AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS W/O MR. D.S. VENKATESH AND D/O LATE RUDRASHETTY R/AT NO.851/1 NEHARU EXTENSION 4TH DIVISION KUSHALNAGAR TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶13

…RESPONDENT

¶14

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNNS), PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN P.C.R.NO.222/2024 ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KUSHALNAGARA, REGISTERED FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 182, 195 AND 211 OF IPC FILED BY THE PETITIONER. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20/09/2024 PASSED IN PCR 222/2023 BY THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE IN DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT FILED U/S 200 OF CR.P.C. FILED

¶15

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:9100 CRL.P. No.11768/2024

¶17

BY THE PETITIONER PASSED BY CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KUSHALNAGAR BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT PETITION, THEREBY RESTORING THE SAME & ETC.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

A private complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. was filed by the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 182, 195, and 211 of the IPC. However, the complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution, prompting the petitioner to approach this Court.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

Section 195(1)(a)(i) 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 a complaint in writing by the concerned public servant or by some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Similarly, Section 195(1)(b)(i) of the Cr.P.C. states that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Sections 193 to 196 of the IPC (both inclusive), except on a complaint in writing by that Court or by such officer of the Court as the Court may authorize in writing, or by some other Court to which that Court is subordinate.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2025:KHC:9100 CRL.P. No.11768/2024

¶26

In light of these specific provisions in Section 195 of the Cr.P.C., the private complaint filed by the petitioner under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. Therefore, the complaint is held to be not maintainable.

¶27

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum under Section 195 of the Cr.P.C.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶30

BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14

D S Venkatesh v. Bhanumathi D v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D S Venkatesh v. Bhanumathi D v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Can Fin Homes Limited Vs Inspector of Police and Station Officer

Sri Manju Bhargav Vs State of Karnataka

Mr.Nkhil P Vs State by North Women Police Station

Mr Siddaramaiah Vs Smt Indiramma

Sri. Zabi Ulla Vs State by

Mr. Imtiyaz Pasha Vs State of Karnataka by