Karnataka High Court
Mr. Mallikarjunaiah vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 July, 2024
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30174
WP No. 29164 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 29164 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MR. MALLIKARJUNAIAH
S/O LAKHSMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO.724,
6TH CROSS,
VIJAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU-560 040
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. THAMMAIAH H N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY V.V. POLICE STATION/CENTRAL PS.,
CHAMARAJPET SUB DIVISION,
Digitally signed by BENGALURU,
NAGAVENI REPRESENTED BY THE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001
2. SRI.S.C. GOPALAKRISHNA
SENIOR SUPERVISOR,
B.B.R. AND R.D.C.C. BANK,
CHAMARAJPET 5TH MAIN ROAD,
CHAMARAPET,
BENGALURU-560 018
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.P.THEJESH, HCGP)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30174
WP No. 29164 of 2023
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
COMPLAINT, F.I.R. IN CRIME NO. 108/2015 REGISTERED BY
R1 POLICE VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND A AGAINST THE
PETITIONER HEREIN AND QUASH THE ENTIRE ORDER SHEETS
IN C.C. NO. 33838/2018, C.C.NO. 33839/2018, C.C. NO.
33847/2018, C.C. NO. 33854/2018, C.C. NO. 33866/2018 AND
C.C. NO. 33892/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-D TO D5 FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 408, 418,
477(A), 420, 120B, R/W 34 OF I.P.C. 1860 ON THE FILE OF
THE HONBLE III ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT
BENGALURU SHEET AGAINST THE PETITIONER.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
Heard Shri Vivek Subba Reddy, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the petitioner and Shri P.Thejesh, learned HCGP
for the State.
2. Learned Senior Counsel would seek to impress upon the
fact that the criminal trial must not be permitted to be
continued on the score that the petitioner's co-accused has
been exonerated and held 'not guilty' in a departmental
proceedings, which was adjudicated by the Karnataka Appellate
Tribunal. He would submit that the findings that are rendered
by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal would squarely become
applicable to the case at hand. He would seek to place reliance
upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case ASHOO
NC: 2024:KHC:30174
SURENDRANATH TEWARI vs. THE DEPUTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EOW, CBI, reported in
(2020) 9 SCC 636 to contend that once there is exoneration
in the Departmental Enquiry or by Tribunal, the criminal
proceedings should not be permitted to be continued.
3. The situation is a little different in the case at hand as the
charges are framed against the petitioner and the matter is at
the stage of the evidence. This court would not lend its
protective hands at the stage, when the charge is framed and
matter is set at evidence.
4. At this juncture, learned Senior Counsel would submit
that he be given liberty to avail of such remedy as available in
law to challenge the action that is prejudicial to his interest.
5. Leaving open such liberty in law and to be initiated in
accordance with law, the petition stands disposed.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
AV
