Karnataka High Court
Shri Prakash S/O Jayasing Gouli vs The State Of Karnataka on 23 May, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6979
CRL.P No. 101496 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101496 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
SHRI. PRAKASH S/O JAYASING GOULI,
AGE. 41 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE WORK,
R/O. GANESH NAGAR, HALIYAL ROAD,
DIST. DHARWAD-580003.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MAQBOOLAHAMED M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR,
DHARWAD SUB-URBAN POLICE STATION,
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011.
... RESPONDENT
Digitally signed
by VINAYAKA B
(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
V
Location: HIGH
VINAYAKA COURT OF
KARNATAKA THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
BV DHARWAD
BENCH
Date:
2024.05.23
SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST
14:32:27 +0530
ACCUSED NO.2/PETITIONER IN CC NO.102/2016 WHICH IS
PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC COURT, DHARWAD FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 78(3) OF KP ACT 1963 (DHARWAD SUB-URBAN P.S. CRIME
NO.08/2016), IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6979
CRL.P No. 101496 of 2024
ORDER
It is submitted that the offence alleged against the
petitioner is under Section 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act,
which is a non-cognizable offence and as such permission
of the learned Magistrate is necessary for investigation
under Section 155 of Cr.P.C. It is submitted that order of
the learned Magistrate on the application of the
Investigation Officer dated 09.01.2016 is not a speaking
order and there is nothing on record to show that learned
Magistrate has applied his mind to the application. It is
submitted that the non speaking order of the learned
Magistrate is not sustainable in view of the observations of
this Court in the case of Vaggeppa Gurulinga Jangaligi
Vs State of Karnataka reported in (2020 1 KCCR
371).
2. A perusal of the order of the learned Magistrate
dated 09.01.2016 would show that it is not a speaking
order.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6979
3. In number of decisions, this court has observed
that grant of permission to investigate a non cognizable
case needs to be on application of mind by the learned
Magistrate. The perusal of the order of the learned
Magistrate dated 09.01.2016 would show that the
following order was passed.
"Received on 09.01.2016 at 1.00 pm. Perused and
permitted".
4. Evidently, the above order is without
application of mind to the contents of the application. It
does not reflect that the learned Magistrate has applied his
mind that it is a non cognizable case and needs permission
under Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C. The judgment of this
Court in the case cited supra is based on several decisions
and detailed guidelines as to how the permission has to be
granted under Section 155(2) Cr.P.C for the investigation
are narrated. Therefore, continuance of the proceedings in
C.C.No.102/2016 pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge and
JMFC, Dharwad for the offence punishable under Section
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6979
78(3) of K.P. Act would be in violation of the requirement
of law and the very initiation of the proceedings is not
sustainable.
5. Hence, the proceedings in C.C.No.102/2016
pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad
are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RKM
CT:BCK
