Vishwanatha Koraga Shetty vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 3529 Kant

                             1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2021

                          BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

            CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3657/2019

BETWEEN:
VISHWANATHA KORAGA SHETTY,
S/O KORAGA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT HOSAOKKALU HOUSE,
KOUDOOR,
KOUDOOR VILLAGE AND POST,
KARKALLA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT - 567 521.
                                        ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI.DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADV.)

AND:

1.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       BY PSI, MANGALORE RURAL P.S.,
       MANGALORE, D.K. DISTRICT.
       REPRESENTED BY
       STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
       HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
       BANGALORE - 560 001.

2.     KRISHNAPPA SALYAN,
       S/O LATE SOMAPPA,
       AGED MAJOR,
       R/AT SHRIPATHI,
       JYOTHINAGAR, VAMANJUR,
       VAMANJUR POST,
                                  2



     THIRUVAIL VILLAGE,
     MANGALORE - 575 124.
                                                   ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1)

     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.2182/2013 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE
IN CR.NO.132/2009 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 148, 504, 120B, 302, 201 R/W 149
OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 25 OF INDIAN ARMS ACT, PENDING
ON THE FILE OF J.M.F.C.-III COURT, MANGALURU.

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

                           ORDER

Heard Sri.Dhananjay Kumar, learned counsel for the

petitioner, who is appearing through video conferencing and

so also learned HCGP for respondent No.1-State, who is

present before the Court physically.

2. In this matter, notice is required against

respondent No.2. But respondent No.2 namely Krishnappa

Salyan S/O Late Somappa, who is the gravemen of the

incident narrated in his complaint and based upon his

compliant, the criminal law was set into motion by registering

the case in Cr.No.132/2009. Subsequent to registration of the

crime, the investigating Officer has taken up the case for

investigation and investigated thoroughly and laid the charge

sheet against the accused in C.C.No.2182/2013 for the

offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504,

120B, 302 and 201 r/w Section 149 of Indian Penal Code,

1860 and so also under Sections 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms

Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

this petitioner is arraigned as accused No.10 and he is

residing in aboard and there is no direct overtact against this

petitioner. This submission made by the learned counsel is

placed on record.

4. Now the charge sheet has been laid against the

accused persons. But case against the co-accused has been

ended in acquittal in S.C.No.112/2009 and S.C.No.70/2010,

dated 16.10.2010. Copy of the said judgments of acquittal

rendered by the trial Court has been produced in this matter

for the purpose of reference.

5. In the meanwhile of completion of the dictation,

learned counsel submits that the petitioner does not

inclination to persuade this matter for seeking intervention as

under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for

quashment of the case in C.C.No.2182/2013 arising out of

Cr.No.132/2009.

6. However, this petitioner, who is arraigned as

accused No.10 and so also some allegations has been made

against the accused relating to the specific offence. Therefore,

it is not proper to refer all the materials, which are facilitated

by the learned counsel for the petitioner for the purpose of

intervention as under Section 482 of Code of Criminal

Procedure.

7. In terms of the aforesaid reasons, I have to

proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

i) Petition filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby disposed of in view of the submission made by the learned counsel that the petitioner is not incline to persuade this matter. Consequently, this petition stands dismissed

ii) Consequently, insofar as the petitioner/ accused No.10, liberty is reserved to file an application under Section 227 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking discharge in accordance with law and only after passing the committal order by the committal Court relating the case in C.C.No.2182/2013 arising out of Cr.No.132/2009. Accordingly, made an observation in this matter.

In pursuance of the order passed in this matter in terms

of the aforesaid reasons, it is deem it appropriate to state that

I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration.

Consequently, I.A.No.1/2019 is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE VM