Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Smt. Raj Rajeshwari vs State Of Karnataka
2022 Latest Caselaw 5324 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5324 Kant
Judgement Date : 24 March, 2022

Karnataka High Court
Smt. Raj Rajeshwari vs State Of Karnataka on 24 March, 2022
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
                            1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                          BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

             CRIMINAL PETITION No.6514 OF 2020
                     CONNECTED WITH
      CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.6512 OF 2020, 6551 OF 2020,
          6554 OF 2020, 6556 OF 2020, 6562 OF 2020
             CRIMINAL PETITION No.6664 OF 2020

IN CRL.P.NO.6514/2020:

BETWEEN

SUMITH CHOWAN,
W/o. PIYUSH CHOWAN,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
RESIDING AT No.90,
PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
NAGONDANAHALLI,
WHITEFIELD,
BANGALORE-560 066.                        ... PETITIONER

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)


AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
   HIGH COURT BUILDING,
   BANGALORE-560 001.
                             2




2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
   PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
   WHITEFIELD,
   BANGALORE-560 066.                      ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----

     CRL.P.NO.6514/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.

IN CRL.P.NO.6512/2020:

BETWEEN

SMT. RAJ RAJESHWARI,
C/O. ARENGA PANDIAN,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.91, 4TH CROSS,
PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
NAGONDANAHALLI,
WHITEFIELD,
BANGALORE-560 066.                         ... PETITIONER.

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
                             3



  BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
  BANGALORE.
  REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
  STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
  HIGH COURT BUILDING,
  BANGALORE-560 001.

2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
   PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
   WHITEFIELD,
   BANGALORE-560 066.                      ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----

     CRL.P.NO.6512/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.


IN CRL.P.NO.6551/2020:

BETWEEN

CHERIAN MATHEW,
S/O. T.T. MUTHAYIAH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
RESIDING AT No.99, 4TH CROSS,
PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
NAGONDANAHALLI,
WHITEFIELD,
                             4



BANGALORE-560 066.                         ... PETITIONER.

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
   HIGH COURT BUILDING,
   BANGALORE-560 001.

2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
   PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
   WHITEFIELD,
   BANGALORE-560 066.                      ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----

     CRL.P.NO.6551/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.

IN CRL.P.NO.6554/2020:

BETWEEN

SUJATHA,
                             5



W/O. DEVANDRA TAK,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT No.90,
PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
NAGONDANAHALLI,
WHITEFIELD,
BANGALORE-560 066.                         ... PETITIONER.

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)


AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
   HIGH COURT BUILDING,
   BANGALORE-560 001.

2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
   PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
   WHITEFIELD,
   BANGALORE-560 066.                      ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----

     CRL.P.NO.6554/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
                            6



READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.

IN CRL.P.NO.6556/2020:

BETWEEN

H.G. ARUN,
S/O. B. GURAYAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 2ND CROSS,
NEAR BATHESHWARA TEMPLE,
MANJUNATH LAYOUT,
BIDHARAHALLI,
BANGALORE-560 102.                    ... PETITIONER.

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)


AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
   HIGH COURT BUILDING,
   BANGALORE-560 001.

2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
   PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
   WHITEFIELD,
   BANGALORE-560 066.                 ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----
                             7




     CRL.P.NO.6556/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.

IN CRL.P.NO.6562/2020:

BETWEEN

ARENGA PANDYAN,
S/O. AYYANATHAN,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
RESIDING AT No.91, 4TH CROSS,
PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
NAGONDANAHALLI,
WHITEFIELD,
BANGALORE-560 066.                         ... PETITIONER.

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)


AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
   HIGH COURT BUILDING,
   BANGALORE-560 001.

2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
                             8



  PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
  WHITEFIELD,
  BANGALORE-560 066.                       ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----

     CRL.P.NO.6562/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.

IN CRL.P.NO.6664/2020:

BETWEEN

JINOO CHERIAN,
S/O. CHERIAN MATHEW,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
RESIDING AT No.99, 4TH CROSS,
PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
NAGONDANAHALLI,
WHITEFIELD,
BANGALORE-560 066.                         ... PETITIONER.

(SRI. SANTHOSH B, ADVOCATE)


AND

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
   BY WHITEFIELD POLICE STATION,
   BANGALORE.
   REPRESENTED BY LEARNED
   STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
                              9



  HIGH COURT BUILDING,
  BANGALORE-560 001.

2. PRAVEEN N,
   S/O. LATE SOUNDARAJA NAIDU,
   AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
   RESIDING AT NO.35,
   PRESTIGE GLEN MORGAN,
   WHITEFIELD,
   BANGALORE-560 066.                        ... RESPONDENTS.

[BY SMT. YASHODA K.P. HCGP FOR R1
R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
                           -----

     CRL.P.NO.6664/2020 IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C.
PRAYING    TO   QUASH    THE    ENTIRE    PROCEEDINGS      IN
C.C.NO.821/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. C.J.M.,
BENGALURU, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.515/2019 OF WHITEFIELD
POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE
UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506 AND 507
READ WITH SECTION 149 OF IPC AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF
LAW.

    THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR, 'FOR BEING
SPOKEN TO', THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                           ORDER

All these petitions arise out of common proceedings in

C.C.No.821 of 2020 filed by different accused. Since the

complaint, the incident and the case remain the same, they are

taken up together and considered by this order.

2. Heard Sri Santhosh B., learned counsel for the

petitioners and Smt.K.P.Yashoda, learned High Court

Government Pleader for respondent No.1, in all these cases. The

complainant - respondent No.2 who is common in all these

cases, is served and remained unrepresented.

3. The petitioners are all residents of an apartment -

Prestige Glen Morgan Layout at Whitefield. The complainant in

all these cases is also a resident of the same apartment complex.

The allegation is, in front of flat Nos.89 to 100 the Association of

the apartment complex conducted a general body meeting and

resolved to construct security room and park in front of Flat

Nos.89 to 100. This was communicated to the owners of the

apartment by way of e-mail. When the work was sought to be

commenced, it appears that owners of flat Nos. 89 to 100

objected to the putting up of the security room in front of their

flats contending that such construction would be blocking the

passage which those flat owners were using. On the next day,

there were altercations between flat owners and petitioners,

which led to both of them registering cases against each other.

The petitioners registered a complaint in Crime No.514 of 2019

for offences punishable under Section 427, 506, 34 and 447 of

the IPC. As a counter blast, the owners of the flats who had

objected to undertaking of works also registered a complaint in

Crime No.515 of 2019 for offences punishable under Sections

341, 323, 143, 504, 141, 447, 448, 506, 507 of the IPC read

with Section 149 of the IPC. Therefore, the present proceedings

are case and counter case.

4. It appears that proceedings which the petitioners had

filed have ended in the filing a 'B' report by the police to which,

the petitioners claim to have filed a protest petition and in the

proceedings against the petitioners, who are arraigned as

accused, the Police have filed the charge sheet. Therefore, it is

a case and counter case that is now brought before this Court.

But what is called in question is the one where the charge sheet

is filed against the petitioners.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

submits that in the case filed by them where the Police have filed

'B' report, the petitioners have filed a protest petition and the

proceedings are pending consideration and would submit that

'B' report is filed as the investigation is done by two different

Investigating Officers in respect of the same incident and would

fall foul of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case

of STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. MISHRILAL (DEAD) AND

OTHERS reported in (2003) 9 SCC 426. He would also submit

that both the proceedings be held simultaneously/together in

terms of Section 210 of the Cr.P.C.

6. On the other hand, the learned High Court Government

Pleader would submit that it is a matter of trial and the case

where 'B' report is filed has nothing to do with the charge sheet

that is filed in the case at hand and it is for the petitioners to

come out clean in the trial.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the

submissions made by the respective learned counsel and

perused the material on record.

8. The afore-narrated events are not in dispute. The

registration of crime by the petitioners against the complainant

is also not in dispute though it is at the stage of consideration or

otherwise of the 'B' report before the competent Court. The

complainant have also registered a crime against the petitioners

for offences as aforesaid. Therefore, these are two cases that

have arisen in a squabble that took place on 09-12-2019. In the

complaint registered by the petitioners against the complainant

in the case at hand and others, the police have after

investigation filed a 'B' report. The offences alleged are prima

facie made out in the complaint and in the recitals in the charge

sheet filed by the police reading -

"PÀ®A 341, 323, 447, 448, 141, 143, 504, 506, 507 ¸À»vÀ 149 L¦¹

ªÉÊmï ¦üÃ¯ïØ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ ¸ÀgÀºÀ¢ÝUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀ ²ªÀPÀÄAlªÀÄä zÉêÀ¸ÁÜ£ÀzÀ §½ EgÀĪÀ ¥Éæ¹ÖÃeï UÉè£ï ªÀiÁUÀð£ï ¯ÉÃOmï £À GvÀÛgÀ ¨sÁUÀzÀ°è ¥sÁèmï £ÀA.89-100 gÀªÀgÀV£À ªÀÄÄA¨sÁUÀ PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁ EzÀÄÝ, F eÁUÀzÀ°è ¥ÁPïð ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÉPÀÆåjn

gÀƪÀiï£ÀÄß PÀnÖ¸ÀĪÀ ¸À®ÄªÁV C¸ÉÆÃ¹AiÉÄõÀ£ï £À Annual General Body Meeting £À°è ZÀað¹ wêÀiÁð£À vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆArzÀÄÝ, F §UÉÎ E-ªÉÄÃ¯ï ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ ¯ÉÃOmï£À J®èjUÀÆ w½¹zÀÄÝ.

¢£ÁAPÀ 09/12/19 gÀAzÀÄ PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁªÀ£ÀÄß QèÃ£ï ªÀiÁr, ¥É¤ìAUï ªÀiÁr¸ÀĪÀ ¸À®ÄªÁV C¸ÉÆÃ¹AiÉÄõÀ£ï ªÀw¬ÄAzÀ ªÀiÁå£ÉÃdgï DzÀ ±À-10 ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀÆ¥ÀgïªÉʸÀgï ¸Á-2 gÀªÀgÀÄ ¸Á-6 jAzÀ ¸Á-9 gÀªÀjAzÀ ªÀÄzsÁåºÀß ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 01.00 UÀAmÉAiÀÄ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁr¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÁUÀ ¥sÁèmï £ÀA.88 jAzÀ 99 gÀªÀgÉV£À ªÀiÁ°ÃPÀgÁzÀ PÁ®A £ÀA.4 gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ J-2, PÁ®A £ÀA.2 gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ J-4, J-5 DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ ¸Á-2 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸Á-10 gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁr¸ÀzÀAvÉ vÀqÉzÀÄ, F eÁUÀ £ÀªÀÄUÉ ¸ÉÃjzÀÄÝ, E°è PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä §AzÀgÉ ¸Á¬Ä¹ ©qÀĪÀÅzÁV ¥Áæt ¨ÉzÀjPÉ ºÁQzÀÄÝ, J-5 DgÉÆÃ¦ ¸Á-2 gÀªÀjUÉ ¨ÉzÀj¹, PÉÊUÀ½AzÀ ºÉÆqÉ¢gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

ºÁUÀÆ EzÉà ¢£À ¢£ÁAPÀ 09/12/19 gÀAzÀÄ J-4 DgÉÆÃ¦ ¸Á-3 gÀªÀgÀ ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ CwPÀæªÀÄ ¥ÀæªÉñÀ ªÀiÁr, PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁ QèÃ£ï ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä PÉ®¸ÀUÁgÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹zÀgÉ ¤ªÀÄUÉ MAzÀÄ UÀw PÁt¸ÀĪÀÅzÁV ¥Áæt ¨ÉzÀjPÉ ºÁQzÀÄÝ, PÁ®A £ÀA.2gÀ°è £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¹gÀĪÀ J-7 DgÉÆÃ¦, ¸Á-3 gÀªÀgÀ ªÉƨÉÊ¯ï £ÀA.9986697352 ºÁUÀÆ ¸Á-5 gÀªÀgÀ ªÉƨÉÊ¯ï £ÀA.9880355388 UÉ vÀ£Àß ªÉƨÉÊ¯ï £ÀA.9535159498 ¤AzÀ PÀgÉ ªÀiÁr PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁzÀ°è PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁr¹gÀĪÀ «µÀAiÀÄzÀ°è CªÁZÀå ±À§ÝUÀ½AzÀ ¨ÉÊzÀÄ ¨ÉzÀjPÉ ºÁQgÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

¢£ÁAPÀ 10/12/19 gÀAzÀÄ ªÀÄzsÁåºÀß ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 03.00 UÀAmÉAiÀÄ ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ¸Á-1, ¸Á-3, ¸Á-4, ¸Á-5, ¸Á-10, ¸Á-11, ¸Á-12, ¸Á-13, ¸Á-14 gÀªÀgÀÄ PÉ®¸ÀUÁgÀgÁzÀ ¸Á-6, ¸Á-7, ¸Á-8, ¸Á-9 gÀªÀjAzÀ PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁªÀ£ÀÄß QèÃ£ï ªÀiÁr¸À®Ä ºÉÆÃzÁUÀ J-1, J-2, J-3, J-4, J-9 J-10, J-11 DgÉÆÃ¦UÀ¼ÀÄ CPÀæªÀÄ UÀÄA¥ÀÄ PÀnÖPÉÆAqÀÄ PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁUÉ ¥ÀæªÉò¹, PÁªÀÄ£ï KjAiÀiÁªÀ£ÀÄß ¨ÁèPï ªÀiÁr, PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁr¸ÀzÀAvÉ vÀqÉzÀÄ, E°è PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁr¹zÀgÉ ¤ªÀÄUÉ MAzÀÄ UÀw PÁt¸ÀĪÀÅzÁV ¥Áæt ¨ÉzÀjPÉ ºÁQgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ vÀ¤SɬÄAzÀ zÀÈqsÀ¥ÀlÖ ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ DgÉÆÃ¥À.

DzÀÝjAzÀ J-1, J-2, J-3, J-4, J-5, J-7, J-9, J-10, J-11 DgÉÆÃ¦vÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÝ zÉÆÃµÁgÉÆÃ¥ÀuÉ."

The fact remains that the aforesaid offences alleged arise out of

the same incident against which the petitioners also have filed

complaint against the complainant in the case at hand. The

complainant and the petitioners are all residents of Prestige Glen

Morgan Layout apartment complex. Since 'B' report is pending

consideration before the competent Court in Crime No.514 of

2019 registered for offences punishable under Sections 427,

447, 506 and 34 of the IPC, I deem it appropriate not to

entertain the present petitions at this juncture as cases brought

before this Court by the petitioners are in the realm of disputed

questions of fact, which necessarily require further proceedings

to be conducted.

9. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners is that, different Investigating Officers on a solitary

incident have acted in two different ways, one filing a charge

sheet and the other, filing a 'B' report. The learned counsel

would submit that it is for that reason the Investigating Officer

in a solitary crime, which is a case and counter case, should be

the same. Consideration of the said submission at this stage is

unwarranted as it is available for the petitioners to urge the

same in the event prejudice is caused by any order that would

be passed by the learned Magistrate. Finding serious disputed

questions of fact, I decline to entertain these petitions at this

stage. However, it is open to the Court to consider the case of

the petitioners in C.C.No.821 of 2020 subject to outcome of

proceedings in Crime No.514 of 2019.

10. With the aforesaid observations all these petitions

stand disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE

nvj

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter