Karnataka High Court
Sri. Abdul Khadar S/O. Rajesab ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 March, 2022
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.101303/2018
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION No.100247/2018
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101303/2018
BETWEEN
SRI ABDUL KHADAR S/O RAJESAB MUNDINMANI,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: ASI,
HANGAL POLICE STATION, HANAGAL,
TAL: HANAGAL, DIST: HAVERI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SRINAND A. PACHHAPURE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD,
BENCH AT DHARWAD.
2. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,
HAVERI, DIST: HAVERI.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)
2
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, SEEKING TO QUASH THE
PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.234/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HANGAL REGISTERED
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 191, 193, 194,
195, 463 & 466 R/W 34 OF IPC ORDER SHEET PETITIONER IS
CONCERNED.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100247/2018
BETWEEN
DR. NAGARAJ SANGAPPA KURI,
AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER AND
GYNECOLOGIST,
R/O: SAMUDAYA AAROGYA KENDRA, GULEDAGUDDA,
TQ: BADAMI, DIST: BAGALKOT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI M. B. GUNDAWADE, ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD
THROUGH CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER,
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT,
HAVERI.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI RAMESH CHIGARI, HCGP)
THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, SEEKING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN
C.C.NO.234 OF 2017 ARISING OUT OF P.C.NO.111/2017, ON
THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HANAGAL,
3
FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 191, 193, 194,
195, 463 AND 466 READ WITH 34 OF IPC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The learned Sessions Judge alleging that the petitioners
have given false evidence passed an order in SC No.28/2015
directing the Chief Administrative Officer of the Principal District
and Sessions Court, Haveri to file a complaint under Section
195(1)(b)(i)(ii) read with Section 340 of Cr.PC before the
learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Hangal. In
pursuance of the said order, a complaint was filed against the
petitioner in PC No.111/2017. Thereafter, the learned
Magistrate took the cognizance of the offences punishable under
Sections 191, 193, 194, 195, 463, 466 read with Section 34 of
IPC against the petitioners. Taking exception to the same, these
petitions are filed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit
that the learned Sessions Judge has passed the order against
the petitioners alleging that the petitioners have given false
evidence in the case by invoking Section 340 of Cr.PC. He
further submits that the impugned order passed by the learned
Sessions Judge is contrary to the provision contained in Section
340 of Cr.PC since the preliminary enquiry as specified under
Section 340(1) of Cr.PC was not conducted and without
recording a finding to that effect has directed the officer
concerned to lodge the complaint against the petitioners, which
is contrary to Section 340(1)(a) and (b) of Cr.PC.
3. On the other hand, the learned High Court
Government Pleader submits that the impugned order passed by
the learned Sessions Judge is in accordance with Section 340 of
Cr.PC and the same does not warrant any interference and
sought for dismissal of the petition.
4. I have examined the submissions of the learned
counsel for the parties.
5. The learned Sessions Judge in his judgment passed
in SC No.28/2015 has held that the petitioners herein who were
examined as PW.14 - Medical Officer of Government Hospital
and PW.15 - Sub-Inspector of Police i.e. Investigating Officer
have committed a serious crime in creating the Court records. A
perusal of the judgment passed in SC No.28/2015 further
discloses that the learned Magistrate was of the view that there
was no need of any preliminary enquiry by this Court on that
material aspect and the said witnesses have created the Court
records by dispensing with conducting preliminary hearing.
6. The learned Magistrate passed an order directing the
Officer concerned to lodge a complaint against the petitioners
under Section 195 (1) and (2) of Cr.PC read with Section 34 of
Cr.PC before the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court,
Hangal.
7. Section 340 of Cr.PC specifies that if the court is of
opinion that if any offence is committed under clause (b) of sub-
section (1) of section 195, such Court may after conducting
preliminary inquiry and recording a finding to that effect make a
complaint thereof in writing. In the present case, the learned
Sessions Judge dispensed with the conducting of preliminary
enquiry, which is mandatory as specified under Section 340 of
Cr.PC. Further the learned Sessions Court without recording a
finding that the petitioners have committed an offence as
referred to in Clause (b) of sub-Section 1 of Section 195 of Cr.PC
has directed the officer concerned to lodge a complaint under
Section 195 of Cr.PC which is contrary to Section 340(1)(b) of
Cr.PC, which specifies that the complaint should be in writing
and thereafter sent it to the learned Magistrate of the First Class
having jurisdiction. Hence, the complaint lodged by the Chief
Administrative Officer and also the impugned order passed by
the learned Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences is one
without jurisdiction.
8. For the aforesaid foregoing reasons, the impugned
order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is contrary to
Section 340 of Cr.PC and the same requires to be quashed.
Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) Criminal petitions stand allowed;
ii) The impugned order dated 18.9.2017 in SC
No.28/2015 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Haveri insofar as it relates to directing the Chief Administrative
Officer of the Principal District and Sessions Court, Haveri to file
complaint under Section 195(1)(b)(i)(ii) read with Section 340 of
Cr.PC in both the petitions is hereby quashed and consequently,
the proceedings pending against the petitioners in CC
No.234/2017 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Hangal, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
bkm
