Karnataka High Court
Sri G Devarajegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 4 September, 2024
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
CRL.P No. 3158 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3158 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
SRI G DEVARAJEGOWDA
SON OF LATE GUNDEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT KAMASAMUDRA VILLAGE
MAVINAKERE POST, HALEKOTE HOBLI,
HOLENARASIPURA TALUK
HASSAN DISTRICT - 573211
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM M., SENIOR ADV. FOR
SRI. SHASHIDHAR BELAGUMBA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH HASSAN CITY POLICE STATION,
HASSAN
REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Digitally signed by
NAGAVENI HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 01
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 2. SMT SATHYABHAMA C
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAGADEESHA B.N., ADDL. SPP.)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE
FIR IN CR.NO.32/2024 REGISTERED BY THE HASSAN CITY POLICE
STATION, AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S 353 OF IPC AND PENDING IN THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
CRL.P No. 3158 of 2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the
registration of a crime in Crime No.32/2024 for offence
punishable under Section 353 of the IPC, before the Hassan
City Police Station, Hassan.
2. Heard the learned Senior counsel
Sri.Aruna Shyam M., for the learned counsel
Sri.Shashidhar Belagumba, appearing for the petitioner and the
learned Additional State Public Prosecutor Sri.Jagadeesha B.N.,
appearing for the respondents.
3. The second respondent - Deputy Commissioner,
Hassan District is the complainant. The gist of the complaint is
that a complaint comes to be registered by the petitioner
alleging that one J Deepak Gowda and his mother were granted
eight CL-7 Excise licenses to run a Bar and Restaurant or a Bar
independently of the restaurant, as the case would be. After
the registration of the complaint, the petitioner appears to have
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
come to the office of the complainant venting out several
grievances. One of the grievance was with regard to
Mr.J.Deepak Gowda having eight CL-7 licenses and several
illegalities on the said license. The petitioner had complained
this to the Commissioner of Excise on 27.09.2023. No action
was taken. The petitioner again registered a complaint now
before the present complainant on 18.03.2024 inter alia with
regard to gross violation of Karnataka Excise Act and also
brought to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner that those
licenses ought to have been withdrawn. Between the dates i.e.,
27.09.2023 to 18.03.2024, happens the subject incident. It is
the case of the complainant that on 14.03.2024 at about
7.00 p.m., the petitioner has without any prior permission in
the compound of the Deputy Commissioner held press
conference and has also hurled certain abuses upon the
complainant. The complainant registers a crime on 19.03.2024
that the act of the petitioner has caused a dent to her respect.
This becomes a crime in Crime No.32/2024 for offence
punishable under Section 353 of the IPC. It is the registration
of the crime that has driven the petitioner to this Court, in the
subject petition.
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
4. The learned Senior counsel would submit that the
allegation against the petitioner is that he had visited the Office
of the Deputy Commissioner, when he was coming out of the
office of the Deputy Commissioner, the press was waiting for a
byte from him. Therefore, he stood and gave a minute byte to
the press with regard to what had transpired in the office of the
Deputy Commissioner. The learned Senior counsel would
further submit that nowhere in the complaint it is alleged by
the Deputy Commissioner that the petitioner had stopped the
Deputy Commissioner from functioning, which would become
an offence under Section 353 of the IPC. He would seek
quashment of the entire proceedings for it being an abuse of
process of law.
5. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor
would submit that the complaint though does not narrate it
happened in the chamber of the Deputy Commissioner, there
are statements recorded and Mahazar drawn later that
everything has happened in the chamber of the Deputy
Commissioner. Therefore, the offence is made out and the
investigation should be permitted to be continued.
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the
contentions of respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.
7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The
issue at present is with regard to the offence under
Section 353 of the IPC and the offence has sprung from the
complaint so registered by the Deputy Commissioner. The
complaint registered by the Deputy Commissioner reads as
follows:
¸ÀASÉå: JA.J.f/551/2023-24 ¢£ÁAPÀ:19/03/2024
ೕ ೕ ಕರು,
ಾಸನ ನಗರ ಾ ೆ,
ಾಸನ.
ಾನ ೆ,
ಷಯ: . ೇವ ಾ ೇ ೌಡ, ವ ೕಲರು ೋ#ೆನರ$ೕಪ&ರರವರ ರುದ(
)ಾನೂನು ೕತ ಕ+ಮ ಜರು.ಸುವ ಕು ತು.
ಉ0ೆ1ೕಖ: 1. 3ೕ ಾ ಜಯ 4 ಟ6 ಯೂಟು 7 8ಾ9ೆ6 ನ 1 " 0ಾ1:)ಾ ೆ
ಆ ೆ ಸ<ಾಲು ಾ ದ ವ ೕಲ ೇವ ಾ ೇ ೌಡ" =ೕ>?)ೆ ಅ4ಯ 1
ಪ+Aಾರ<ಾ.ರುವ 4Bೕ ¢£ÁAPÀ:15/03/2024
2. ಬಹುಜನರ ಧG HನಪI+)ೆಯ ಪ&ಟ ಸಂKೆ :02 ರ 1 ಪ+ಕಟ<ಾ.ರುವ
¢£ÁAPÀ: 16/03/2024
3. ಈ ಕMೇ ಯ ಸಮ ಪತ+ ಸಂKೆ H9ಾಂಕ:09/02/2024
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
4. ಈ ಕMೇ ಯ IಳOವP)ೆ ಪತ+ H9ಾಂಕ:16/03/2024
5. . ೇವ ಾ ೇ ೌಡ ಾಸನ ರವರ ಪ+ತು ತQರ H9ಾಂಕ:
18/03/2024.
*****
RೕಲSಂಡ ಷಯ)ೆS ಸಂಬಂ:$ದಂTೆ ಉ0ೆ1ೕಖದ ಪತ+ದನUಯ . ೇವ ಾ ೇ ೌಡ
ವ ೕಲರು ೊ#ೆನರ$ೕಪ&ರ ರವರು H9ಾಂಕ:14/03/2024ರ ಗುರು<ಾರ ಸಂ ೆ:7:00 ಗಂVೆ
ಸಮಯದ 1 Wಾವ& ೇ ಅನುಮI ಪXೆಯ ೆ 0ಾ1:)ಾ ಗಳ ಕ8ೇ ಯ ಅವರಣದ 1 ಪI+)ಾ
Zೂೕ>[ ೕ4ರುTಾQ ೆ ಮತುQ ನನ ೆ ಂ:$ ಸ)ಾ?ರದ ಾಗೂ Aಾವ?ಜ ಕರ ಕತ?ವ )ೆS
ಅಡಚ ೆ ಉಂಟು ಾ4ರುTಾQ ೆ. ಮತುQ ಕ#ೆದ ಆರು Iಂಗಳ ]ಂ ೆ )ಾನೂನು ^ಾ]ರ<ಾ.
ನXೆಯುIQರುವ ಚನ_ ಾಯಪಟ`ಣ Tಾಲೂ1 ನ ಆ ಾ ^ಾa ಅಂb ೆAೊ`ೕ ೆಂc ಗಳ
ರುದ( ಅಬ)ಾ ಇ0ಾKೆ ಆಯುಕQರು ತ Kೆ ನXೆ$ ಯಮ ಉಲಂe$ರುವ&ದು ದೃಢಪh`ದುi
ಕ+ಮ )ೈ ೊಳOkವಂTೆ 0ಾ1:)ಾ ಗP ೆ ವರH ಾಡ0ಾ.ರುತQ ೆಂದು. ಆದ ೆ
0ಾ1:)ಾ ಗ#ಾದ ಸತ lಾಮರವರು ಆ ಾ ^ಾa ಅಂb ೆAೊ`ೕ ೆಂcಗಳ ರುದ( ಕ+ಮ
)ೈ ೊಳOkವ ಬದ0ಾ. ಕಡತಗಳನು_ ತಮm ಬPnೕ ಇಟು`)ೊಂಡು ಅವ ವ ಾರ
ಾಡುIQರುವವರ ಪರ<ಾ. )ೆಲಸ ಾಡುIQ ಾi ೆ ಎಂದು ಆ ೋp$ H9ಾಂಕ:
15/03/2024ರ ಸುHiZೂೕ>[ಯ 1 IP$ರುTಾQ ೆ ಸದ ಷಯವ&
H9ಾಂಕ:16/03/2024ರಂದು ಉ0ೆ1ೕಖ(2)ರ Hನ ಪI+)ೆಯ 1 ಪ+ಕಟ<ಾ.ರುತQ ೆ.
ಉ0ೆ1ೕಖ(4)ರ 1 ಸದ ಷಯದ ಬ ೆq ಆ ೋp$ರುವ ಕು ತು ಮm ಬP ಇರುವ
Aಾrಾsಾರದ ಪtರಕ ಾಖ0ೆಗಳನು_ ಈ ಕMೇ ೆ 07 Hನಗ#ೆu ಳ ೆ ೕಡಲು ಸೂv$
ತpwದ 1 ೕವ& ಾ4ರುವ ಸುಳOk ಆ ೋಪದ ರುದ( ಸೂಕQ )ಾನೂನು ಕ+ಮ
ಜರು.ಸ0ಾಗುವ&ದು ಎಂದು . ೇವ ಾ ೇ ೌಡ ºÉƼɣÀgÀ¹Ã¥ÀÄgÀ ರವ ೆ IಳOವP)ೆ ಪತ+
ಾ ಾಡ0ಾ.ರುತQ ೆ.
H9ಾಂಕ:18/03/2024 ರಂದು =+ೕ . ೇವ ಾ ೇ ಾಡ ೆ IಳOವP)ೆ ಪತ+
ಾ Wಾ.ದುi ಸದ Hನದಂ ೇ ಈ ಕMೇ ೆ ಪ+ತು ತQರ ಸ 1$ರುTಾQ ೆ. ಸದ
ಪ+ತು ತQರದ 1 "ಅ:)ಾರ ದುರುಪBೕಗ ಾಗೂ ದುನ?ಡTೆxಂ ೆ ನXೆದು)ೊಂ4ರುವ ಬ ೆq
ಪI+)ಾ Zೂೕ>[ಯ 1 9ಾಗ ೕಕ ೆ IPಸ0ಾ. ೆ. ಆದ ೆ ೕವ& ನನ ೆ
H9ಾಂಕ:16/03/2024 ರಂದು ನನ_ನು_ ^ೆದ ಸಲು IಳOವP)ೆ ಪತ+ವನು_ ೕ4ರುIQೕರ ಈ
ೕIಯ ^ೆದ )ೆಗP ೆ )ಾನೂನು ೕIಯ 1 ಉತQರ )ೊಡುTೆQೕ9ೆ. Tಾವ& ಈ ಕೂಡ0ೇ 9ೈIಕ
ೊ ೆ ೊತುQ ತಮm ಹು ೆixಂದ ಗ?y$ದ ೆ ೕವ& ಈ ಸ ಾಜವನು_ ಾಗೂ
9ಾಗ ೕಕರನು_ ೌರ $ದಂTಾಗುತQ ೆ. Tಾವ& ಇ ೇ ೕIಯ 1 ದುನ?ಡTೆxಂದ ವI?$ದ ೆ
ತಮmನು_ ಕೂಡ0ೇ ಕತ?ವ 0ೋಪ, ಅ:)ಾರ ದುರಪBೕಗ ಾಗೂ ದುನ?ಡTೆಯ ಆsಾರ
Rೕ0ೆ ಮmನು_ Aೇ<ೆxಂದ ವ ಾ ೊPಸಲು )ಾನೂನು ೋ ಾಟ ನXೆಸ0ಾಗುವ&ದು"
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
ಎಂದು ಪ+ತು ತQರ ಸ 1$ರುTಾQ ೆ. ಆದ ೆ ನನ_ ರುದ( ಾಸನ 0ೆ1ಯ 1 ಅತ ಂತ ಕಡು ಭ+ಷ`
0ಾ1:)ಾ Wಾ.ದi ೆಂದು ಾ4ರುವ ಆ ೋಪಗP ೆ ಸಂಬಂ:$ದ Wಾವ& ೇ
Aಾrಾ ಾರದ ಪtರಕ ಾಖ0ೆಗಳನು_ ಪತ+ದ ೊTೆ ಸ 1$ರುವ&Hಲ1.
ಚನ_ ಾಯಪಟ`ಣ Tಾಲೂ1 ನ ಆ ಾ ೆಂcಗಳ
^ಾa ಅಂb ೆAೊ`ೕ ೆಂcಗಳ ರುದ( ಅಬ)ಾ
ಇ0ಾKೆ ಆಯುಕQರು ತ Kೆ ನXೆ$ ೆಂcಗಳ
ಯಮ ಉಲಂe$ರುವ ^ಾa ಅಂb ೆAೊ`ೕ ೆಂc ಗಳ ರುದ(
ಕ+ಮ)ೆS ಬ ೆHರುವ ಪತ+ದ ಬ ೆq ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ` ಮೂಲ ಕಡತ ೊಂH ೆ ಮಂ4$ ಕ+ಮವ]ಸಲು ಉಪ
ಆಯುಕQರು ಅಬ)ಾ ಇ0ಾKೆ ಾಸನ ರವ ೆ H9ಾಂಕ:09/02/2024 ರಂದು ಉ0ೆ1ೕಖ(3)ರ 1 ಪತ+
ಬ ೆಯ0ಾ.ದುi ಸದ 8ಾರ<ಾ. ಅಬ)ಾ ಇ0ಾKೆxಂದ )ೈ ೊಂಡ ಕ+ಮದ ವರHಯನು_
ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟ` ಇ0ಾKೆxಂದ ಪXೆಯಬಹು ಾ.ರುತQ ೆ ಎಂದು IP$ದರೂ ಸಹ ಸದ ಯವರು
H9ಾಂಕ:14/03/2024ರ ಗುರು<ಾರ ಸಂ ೆ:7:00 ಗಂVೆ ಸಮಯದ 1 ಅನಗತ <ಾ. ನನ ೆ ಂ:$, )ೈ
ಸ9ೆ_ಯನು_ ಾ4 ^ೆದ $ ಎತQಂಗ4 ಾ4$ರುTೆQೕ9ೆ ಎಂದು ೇP ಸ)ಾ?ರದ ಮತುQ Aಾವ?ಜ ಕರ
ಕತ?ವ )ೆS ಅಡಚ ೆ ಉಂಟು ಾ4, ಧ ಇ0ಾKೆಯ ಅ:)ಾ ಗಳO ಇ0ಾKಾ )ೆಲಸ)ಾS. ಬಂHದುi ಆ
)ೆಲಸವನು_ 4$ರುTಾQ
ವ?]ಸಲು Aಾಧ <ಾಗದಂTೆ ಕತ?ವ )ೆS ಅ4{ಪ4$ರುTಾQ ೆ. 0ಾ1:)ಾ ಮತುQ
0ಾ1ದಂXಾ:)ಾ Wಾದ ನನ_ ರುದ( Wಾವ& ೇ ಪtರಕ ಾಖ0ೆಗಳನು_ ೊಂHರ ೆ ಸುHi ೋ>[
ನXೆ$ರುTಾQ ೆ. ಇದi ಂದ ನನ ೆ ಸ)ಾ?ರದ ಾಗೂ Aಾವ?ಜ ಕರ ಕತ?ವ )ೆS ]ನ_XೆಉಂVಾ.ದುi
ೌರವ)ೆS
0ೆ1ಯ Aಾವ?ಜ ಕರು ಮತುQ ಸ)ಾ?ರದ ಮಟ`ದ 1 ನನ_ Rೕ0ೆ ಇh`ದ ೌರವ)ೆS ದ)ೆS ಉಂVಾ.ರುತQ ೆ.
ಆದi ಂದ 0ೆ1ಯ 1 ಮTೊQRm ಇಂತಹ ಪ+ಕರಣಗಳO ಮರುಕPಸದಂTೆ .
ೇವ ಾ ೇ ೌಡ, ವ ೕಲರು, )ಾಮಸಮುದ+ ಾ+ಮ, ಹ#ೇ)ೋVೆ ೋಬP, ೊ#ೆನರ$ೕಪ&ರ
Tಾಲೂ1ಕುರವರ ರುದ( ಐ.p.$.353 ಮತುQ ಇತರ ಅನUಯ<ಾUÀĪÀ PÀ®AUÀ¼À CrAiÀÄ°è
¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉƼÀÄîªÀAvÉ ¸ÀÆa¹zÉ."
8. It is the complaint of the Deputy Commissioner so
registered on 19.03.2024 that on 14.03.2024 at about
7.00 p.m., without any permission from the Deputy
Commissioner, the petitioner has conducted a press conference
in the premises of the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy
Commissioner further alleges that the petitioner had brought
down her respect by speaking loud in front of the other
Officers. All this according to the complainant has resulted in
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
stopping of her performance of public duties and therefore, it
has become an offence under Section 353 of the IPC.
9. The justification of the learned Senior counsel is
that when the petitioner walked out of the chamber of the
Deputy Commissioner when he had agitated with regard to
eight CL-7 licenses being given to someone or any other issue,
the people from the press had taken a byte from him with
regard to what has happened inside. The justification stands
to reason for the reason that there is no averment in the
complaint that the petitioner has entered the chamber of the
Deputy Commissioner, created a problem or stopped the
Deputy Commissioner from performing her functions. If that is
not the complaint, the foundation becomes shaky. The State
wants to build a superstructure on the shaky foundation by
recording statements after the event had happened. The event
admittedly had happened on 14.03.2024 and the complaint
itself comes to be registered on 19.03.2024. The complainant
is the Deputy Commissioner. If what is narrated in the
complaint, it would not take five full days for the complainant
to wake up and register the complaint. If the Deputy
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
Commissioner's functioning has been impeded, she ought to
have without any loss of time registered the complaint, not
thinking for five days that what kind of complaint should be
registered. Therefore between 14.03.2024 and 19.03.2024 it is
obvious that the second respondent was collecting evidence to
register the crime. Thus, the very incident is shrouded with
inherent improbability that would necessarily lead to
obliteration of the crime, as the ingredients that are necessary
for an offence punishable under Section 353 of the IPC are
completely lacking in the case at hand. Section 353 of the IPC
reads as follows:
" 353. Assault or criminal force to deter public servant
from discharge of his duty.--
Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person
being a public servant in the execution of his duty as
such public servant, or with intent to prevent or deter
that person from discharging his duty as such public
servant, or in consequence of anything done or
attempted to be done by such person in the lawful
discharge of his duty as such public servant, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or
with both."
Section 353 of the IPC directs whoever assaults or uses
criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of their
duty they would become open to prosecution. It uses the
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
words assault, criminal force. The significance and
interpretation of these words need not detain this Court for
long or delve deep into the matter.
10. A three Judges Bench of the Apex Court in the case
of Mahendra Kumar Sonker vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 1924, has held as follows:
"15. At the outset, we extract hereinbelow
Section 353 of the IPC:
"353.- Assault or criminal force to deter public
servant from discharge of his duty. - Whoever
assaults or uses criminal force to any person
being a public servant in the execution of his
duty as such public servant, or with intent to
prevent or deter that person from discharging
his duty as such public servant, or in
consequence of anything done or attempted to
be done by such person in the lawful discharge
of his duty as such public servant, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both."
A perusal of Section 353 indicates that whoever
assaults or uses criminal force (a) to any person
being a public servant in the execution of his duty as
such public servant, or (b) with intent to prevent or
deter that person from discharging his duty as such
public servant, or (c) in consequence of anything
done or attempted to be done by such person in the
lawful discharge of his duty as such public servant,
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
shall be punished with the imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two
years, or with fine, or with both.
16. It is important at this stage to notice the
definition of criminal force as defined in Section 350
of the IPC.
"350. Criminal force.- Whoever intentionally
uses force to any person, without that person's
consent, in order to the committing of any
offence, or intending by the use of such force to
cause, or knowing it to be likely that by the use
of such force he will cause injury, fear or
annoyance to the person to whom the force is
used, is said to use criminal force to that other."
As would be clear, what is required to establish
criminal force is intentional use of force to any
person without that person's consent in order to the
committing of any offence.
17. Section 349 of the IPC which defines force is
extracted hereinbelow :
"349. Force.- A person is said to use force
to another if he causes motion, change of
motion, or cessation of motion to that other, or
if he causes to any substance such motion, or
change of motion, or cessation of motion as
brings that substance into contact with any part
of that other's body, or with anything which that
other is wearing or carrying, or with anything so
situated that such contact affects that other's
sense of feeling: Provided that the person
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
causing the motion, or change of motion, or
cessation of motion, causes that motion, change
of motion, or cessation of motion in one of the
three ways hereinafter described.
First. - By his own bodily power.
Secondly. - By disposing any substance in
such a manner that the motion or change or
cessation of motion takes place without any
further act on his part, or on the part of any
other person.
Thirdly. - By inducing any animal to move,
to change its motion, or to cease to move."
18. Assault under Section 351 of the IPC would
mean whoever makes any gesture, or any
preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that
such gesture or preparation will cause any person
present to apprehend that he who makes that
gesture or preparation is about to use criminal force
to that person.
19. In this background, if we peruse the
evidence on record, insofar as the charge under
Section 353 of the IPC is concerned, it will transpire
that none of the ingredients required for convicting a
person under Section 353 of IPC were attracted."
11. The Apex Court holds that Section 353 of the IPC
requires use of criminal force or even force. Section 349 of the
IPC and Section 350 of the IPC deal with force and criminal
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
force, which the Apex Court considers. The Apex Court holds
that the evidence therein did not meet the ingredient of
Section 353 of the IPC. If the findings of the Apex Court are
paraphrased to the facts obtaining in the case on hand, what
would unmistakably emerge is that none of the ingredients that
are necessary for a force, criminal force for it to become an
offence under Section 353 of the IPC is present even to its
semblance, though the case before the Apex Court was after
trial, I deem it appropriate to follow the same even to obliterate
the FIR on the ground that the complaint does not have the
foundational facts for it to become the ingredients of
Section 353 of the IPC. It is undoubtedly shrouded with
inherent improbability. It becomes apposite to refer to the
judgment of the Apex Court in the case of STATE OF HARYANA
v. BHAJANLAL1, wherein the Apex Court has held as follows:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the
various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter
XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court
in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent
powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we give the following
categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such
power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the
1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any
precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an
exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such
power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if
they are taken at their face value and accepted
in their entirety do not prima facie constitute
any offence or make out a case against the
accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first
information report and other materials, if
any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose
a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under
Section 156(1) of the Code except under
an order of a Magistrate within the purview
of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations
made in the FIR or complaint and the
evidence collected in support of the same
do not disclose the commission of any
offence and make out a case against the
accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not
constitute a cognizable offence but
constitute only a non-cognizable offence,
no investigation is permitted by a police
officer without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) of the
Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently
improbable on the basis of which no prudent
person can ever reach a just conclusion that
there is sufficient ground for proceeding against
the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar
engrafted in any of the provisions of the
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
Code or the concerned Act (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the
institution and continuance of the
proceedings and/or where there is a
specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved
party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the
proceeding is maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on
the accused and with a view to spite him
due to private and personal grudge."
In the light of the aforesaid reasons and the
judgments of the Apex Court quoted supra, if further
investigation is permitted to continue, it would become
an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage
of justice."
The Apex Court has held that at the stage of crime it can
be obliterated, if in the event, if the event is said to be true,
even it does not make out an offence.
12. In the light of the complaint not making even a
semblance of the offence, permitting further investigation
against the petitioner would become an abuse of process of law
and result in miscarriage of justice.
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC:36091
13. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed; and
ii) The FIR in Crime No.32/2024 registered by
the Hassan City Police Station, Hassan,
pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge
and J.M.F.C., Court, Hassan District, Hassan,
qua the petitioner, stands quashed.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
KG
