Karnataka High Court
Sri.Pradeep Eshwar vs State Of Karnataka on 19 July, 2021
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
CRL.P.2033/2021
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRL.P.No.2033/2021
BETWEEN:
SRI.PRADEEP ESHWAR
S/O. LATE. ESHWAR,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
LECTURER,
PERESANDRA,
CHIKKABALLAPURA.
PRESENTLY AT
IN FRONT OF MAKKALAKOOTA,
CHAMARAJPETE,
BANGALORE 560018. ... PETITIONER
(BY MISS SOFIYA FOR
SRI KAMALUDDIN AHMAD, ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN POLICE STATION,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE 560001.
2. SRI. SUDHAKAR K.
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
PERESANDRA,
CHIKKABALLAPUR 562104. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI R.D.RENUKARADHYA, HCGP FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED:24.05.2021)
CRL.P.2033/2021
2
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C,
praying to quash the entire further proceedings in
C.C.No.398/2019 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge
and CJM, Chikkaballapura for the offence P/U/S 171G of IPC
(Annexure-A).
This petition coming on for Admission, this day, the
Court made the following:
ORDER
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the
learned HCGP for respondent no.1-State.
2. Petitioner, who is the sole accused in
C.C.No.398/2019 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil
Judge & CJM, Chickaballapur, arising out of Crime
No.138/2018 registered by Chickaballapura Police Station,
for the offence punishable under Section 171G of IPC, has
approached this Court with a prayer to quash the entire
proceedings in the said case.
3. Brief facts of the case as revealed from the records
are, a complaint was filed by respondent no.2 herein on
02.05.2018 alleging that the petitioner herein had made
CRL.P.2033/2021
various allegations against the complainant on social
media platform from his mobile number violating the
model code of conduct that was in force during the
assembly elections. The said complaint was initially
registered as NCR No.118/2018. Thereafter, respondent
no.1 had made a requisition to the learned Magistrate
seeking permission to register the case against the
petitioner. The learned Magistrate has permitted the
respondent-police to register the case by endorsing on the
very requisition itself. Thereafter, the respondent-Police
have registered an FIR in Crime No.138/2018 for the
offence under Section 171G IPC against the petitioner.
After investigation, the police have filed the charge sheet.
Being aggrieved by the criminal proceedings now initiated,
petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to
quash the entire proceedings.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
offence under Section 171G IPC, is a non-cognizable
offence, and therefore, the police before the registering the
case, ought to have obtained permission from the
CRL.P.2033/2021
jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 155(2) Cr.PC, and
the same has not been done in the present case, and
therefore, in the absence of such a permission as required
under Section 155(2) Cr.PC, the learned Magistrate ought
not to have taken cognizance of the alleged offences.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP opposing the petition
submits that immediately after receiving the complaint, a
requisition has been submitted to the jurisdictional
Magistrate on 02.05.2018 itself and on the requisition
itself, the learned Magistrate has passed an order
permitting the police to register the case and investigate
the same. He submits that since the charge sheet has
already been filed, the accused person is liable to be tried
for the alleged offence.
6. The only offence alleged against the petitioner in the
present case is under Section 171G of IPC. The said
offence is admittedly a non-cognizable offence, and
therefore, compliance of Section 155(2) Cr.PC is
mandatory. In the case on hand, on the requisition
CRL.P.2033/2021
submitted by the police, the learned Magistrate has made
an endorsement to the effect that permission is granted.
7. This Court in Crl.P.No.101997/2019 disposed of on
10.12.2019, has held that such an endorsement made by
the learned Magistrate on the requisition letter is not a
compliance of requirement of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C.
This Court has held that the learned Magistrate is required
to pass an order to the said effect in a separate order sheet
which is required to be maintained in which subsequent
proceedings of the case is required to be continued and
endorsement made in the requisition letter would not
suffice the compliance of Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C.
8. In the instant case, as could be seen from the entire
charge sheet, no such permission has been taken by the
police to investigate the offence under Section 171G of IPC.
Therefore, the aforesaid judgment of this Court is squarely
applicable to the facts of the present case. The
endorsement made by the learned Magistrate in the
requisition submitted by the police cannot be considered
CRL.P.2033/2021
as an order under Section 155(2) Cr.PC and as held by this
Court in the aforesaid judgment, the learned Magistrate
ought to have passed such an order in a separate order
sheet which is required to be maintained. The same having
not been done, the entire proceedings gets vitiated. Under
the circumstances, continuation of further proceedings
would amount to abuse of the process of law and for the
purpose of securing the ends of justice, the impugned
criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Accordingly,
I proceed to pass the following order:
9. Criminal petition is allowed. The entire proceedings
in C.C.No.398/2019 pending on the file of Prl. Senior Civil
Judge & CJM, Chickaballapur, arising out of Crime
No.138/2018 registered by Chickaballapura Police Station,
for the offence punishable under Section 171G of IPC,
stands quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KK
