Karnataka High Court

Sri. Munirathna vs State Of Karnataka By on 7 March, 2025

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                            1



Reserved on   : 20.02.2025
Pronounced on : 07.03.2025
                                                       R
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

           DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

                           BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

             CRIMINAL PETITION No.1724 OF 2025

BETWEEN:

SRI MUNIRATHNA
S/O LATE SUBRAMANYA NAIDU,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
141, 11TH A CROSS,
VYALIKAVAL, MALLESWARAM,
BENGALURU - 560 059.

ALSO AT
AS PER AADHAAR

NO.147, 11TH CROSS,
MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU - 560 003.

                                              ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SR.ADVOCATE FOR
    SRI SRINIVAS RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
     BY VYALIKAVAL POLICE STATION [S.I.T]
     REPRESENTED BY SPP
                              2




      HIGH COURT BUILDING,
     BENGALURU - 560 001.

2.   SRI CHELUVARAJU
     AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
     S/O LATE SRI. KARIAPPA
     RESIDING AT NO.F-114, B.E.L LAYOUT,
     1ST STAGE, BHARATH NAGAR,
     BENGALURU - 560 091.
                                                 ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI PRADEEP C.S., ADDL.AG A/W SRI JAGADEESHA B.N., ADDL.SPP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.121/2024 DTD 13.09.2024 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 VYALIKAVAL P.S., (S.I.T) FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 504, 506, 323, 385, 420 R/W 37 OF THE IPC, 1860, ON THE FILE OF THE XLII ACJM, AND SPECIAL COURT FOR CASES AGAINST MPs/MLAs, BENGALURU, BASED ON THE WRITTEN INFORMATION OF RESPONDENT NO.2.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 20.02.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

The petitioner/accused is before this Court calling in question

registration of a crime in Crime No.121 of 2024 registered for

offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, 323, 385, 420 and 37

of the IPC and pending before the XLII Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate (ACJM) and Special Court for cases against MPs & MLAs,

Bengaluru.

2. Heard Sri Ashok Haranahalli, learned senior counsel

appearing for petitioner and Sri Pradeep C.S., learned Additional

Advocate General along with Sri Jagadeesha B.N., learned

Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondents.

3. The facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-

The 2nd respondent is the complainant. A complaint comes to

be registered on 13-09-2024 alleging that the petitioner had

demanded money from the informant to carry on his garbage

disposal work, as he was a contractor who had been entrusted the

contract under the Solid Waste Management Tender of the Bruhat

Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike ('BBMP'). Two other crimes are

registered which are not subject matter of the present lis, but their

reference becomes necessary. On the same day, crime in Crime

No.122 of 2024 is registered alleging hurling of abuses by the

petitioner taking the caste of the informant therein to his friend.

The 3rd crime in Crime No.312 of 2024 is registered against the

petitioner on the allegation that the informant therein was allegedly

raped half a decade ago. Since these crimes had emerged against

the petitioner by different informants for different offences, the

State thought it fit to constitute a Special Investigation Team ('SIT')

of the Criminal Investigation Department ('CID'). In furtherance

whereof, a notification comes to be issued directing all criminal

proceedings registered against the petitioner be investigated by the

SIT. The continuance of investigation against the petitioner in

Crime No.121 of 2024 forms the fulcrum of the present lis.

4. The learned senior counsel Sri Ashok Haranahalli appearing

for the petitioner takes this Court through the complaint so

registered to contend that the complaint is a product of political

conspiracy against the petitioner. He would contend that the events

narrated in the complaint are about five years old and is

deliberately registered in the year 2024 to wreak vengeance against

the petitioner. Apart from the aforesaid contention, the learned

senior counsel would submit that constitution of SIT itself is

contrary to law. Therefore, all the investigations undertaken are

contrary to law. He would seek quashment of entire investigation

on the aforesaid twin scores.

5. Per contra, the learned Additional State Public Prosecutor

would vehemently refute the submissions of the learned counsel for

the petitioner by taking this Court through the complaint itself. It is

his submission that the complaint does not stop at 2019. The

harassment of the petitioner in demanding money continues from

2019 through 2024. Therefore, there is no delay attracted in the

case at hand, as the petitioner continued the offence. Insofar as

constitution of SIT is concerned, the learned Additional State Public

Prosecutor would contend that it is strictly in consonance with law

and does not warrant any interference, as the Government is

empowered to create a SIT to investigate into the crimes that are of

certain significance.

6. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner would join

issue in taking this Court through the constitution of the SIT and

point out that except the head of the SIT two other members do

not belong to the CID. If the SIT is constituted of the CID, all

officers need to be from the CID. He would further contend that

the order constituting SIT directs that the final report should be

filed before the Government and not before the concerned Court.

Therefore, the very order constituting SIT is full of flaws. The

investigation, therefore, should be quashed.

7. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would clarify

the position by placing reliance upon the judgments of the Apex

Court in the case of VINEET NARAIN v. UNION OF INDIA1 and

of the learned single Judge of this Court in the case of IDEYA

VENDAN R. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA2 to contend that the

petitioner has to come out clean in the proceedings.

(1998) 1 SCC 226

W.P.No.7246-7250 of 2013 decided on 26-09-2013

8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions

made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the

material on record.

9. The afore-narrated facts form the fulcrum of the complaint

in Crime No.121 of 2024. Since the entire issue has now sprung

from the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the contents of

the complaint insofar as they are germane. It reads:-

     "ರವ      ೆ:                                              ¢£ÁAPÀ: 13/9/2024

         ೕ ೕ       ಆಯುಕರು,
      ೆಂಗಳ ರು ನಗರ


     EAzÀ:
         ೕ ೆಲುವ ಾಜು
     ©        : ಕ ಯಪ! "ಾ#, ವPÀÌ°UÀ
     44 ವµÀð, ಗು# ೆ$ಾರರು,
     ªÁ¸À: £ÀA.J¥sï-114, ©.E.J¯ï. ¯ÉÃOmï
     '1%ೇ ಹಂತ, (ಾರ) ನಗರ, ೆಂಗಳ ರು - 560 091
     ªÉÆ¨ÉÊ¯ï £ÀA. 9141682159

F ªÉÄÃ¯ï «¼Á¸À [email protected]

¸Áé«Ä,

*ಷಯ: ,ಾ-. ನಂ. 42 ಲQëöäÃ$ೇ*ನಗರ ,ಾ-.ನ /ನ ಮತು ಸದ ,ಾ-. ನ /ನ

3. $ೇವ ಾಜು ಅರಸು ಟ 6 ಟ7.ನ8 ಪ $ೇಶದ ಘನ ;ಾ<ಜ< ಸಂಗ ಹ=ೆ ಮತು *>ೇ,ಾ ?ವ.ಹ=ೆ @ೆಲಸದ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಾಜ ಾ"ೇಶC ನಗರ Dಾಸಕ ಾದ ೕ ಮು?ರತE ರವರು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ ?ೕಡುವಂ;ೆ ;ೊಂದ ೆ ?ೕಡು#ರುವ Jಾಗು Kೕವ ೆದ @ೆ Jಾಕು#ರುವ ಬ ೆL ?ೕಡು#ರುವ ದೂರು.

%ಾನು MೕಲNಂಡ *Oಾಸದ / ಸಂPಾರ ಸMೕತ ,ಾಸ Qಾ3@ೊಂಡು M।। ಗಂ ಾ ಎಂಟS TೆUಸ , ಎಂಬ Jೆಸ ನ / ಪರ,ಾನV ಪWೆದು ಗು# ೆ$ಾರ%ಾV @ೆಲಸ Qಾ3@ೊಂ3ರು;ೇ%ೆ. ಸದ ಕXೇ ಯ *Oಾಸ ನಂ. 4, 18%ೇ @ಾ , #ಗಳರTಾಳ< ಮುಖ<ರPೆ, @ಾZಕನಗರ, [ೕಣ< 2%ೇ ಹಂತ, ಕ JೋಬನಹZ\, ೆಂಗಳ ರು ಉತರ, [ೕಣ< @ೈ ಾ @ಾ ಪ $ೇಶ, ೆಂಗಳ ರು-560058 ಆVರುತ$ೆ.

%ಾನು _._.ಎಂ.[. `ಂದ ನWೆaದ ಘನ ;ಾ<ಜ< ?ವ.ಹ=ೆ ಮತು *>ೇ,ಾ ಸಂಬಂಧ ?ಯQಾನುPಾರ bೆಂಡS ಪWೆದು %ಾಂಕ: 05.07.2019 ರಂದು ಸರಬ ಾಜು ಆ$ೇಶ ಪWೆದು ಅಂ ?ಂದ ೆಂಗಳ ರು ನಗರದ _._.ಎಂ.[. ,ಾ<[ಯ ,ಾ-. ನಂ. 42, ಲcd$ೇ*ನಗರ ,ಾ-. ನ /

3. $ೇವ ಾಜು ಅರಸು ಟ 6 ಟ7.ನ8 ಪ $ೇಶದ ಘನ ;ಾ<ಜ< ಸಂಗ ಹ=ೆ ಮತು *>ೇ,ಾ ಸಂಬಂಧ @ೆಲಸ Qಾಡು#ರು;ೇ%ೆ. %ಾನು ?ವ.eಸು#ರುವ ,ಾ-. ನಂ. 42 ೆಂಗಳ ನ ಾಜ ಾ"ೇಶC ನಗರದ *fಾನಸ(ಾ gೇತ ದ ,ಾ<[ ೆ ಬರುತ$ೆ. ಪ ಸುತ ಾಜ ಾ"ೇಶC ನಗರ *fಾನಸ(ಾ PÉëÃvÀæzÀ°è ²æÃ ಮು?ರvÀß gÀªÀgÀÄ ©eÉ¦ ¥ÀPÀë¢AzÀ ಆhNiಾV Dಾಸಕ ಾVರು;ಾ ೆ.

PೆTೆjಂಬS 2021 ರ kದಲ%ೇ ,ಾರದ / ಎಂಎ8 ಎ ಮು?ರತE ರವರ ಗ Qಾ< ೕ *ಜಯಕುQಾS ನನ ೆ ೕ Qಾ3 ಎಂಎ8ಎ PಾJೇಬರು ?ನE "ೊ;ೆ Qಾತ%ಾಡ ೇಕಂ;ೆ, ?ೕವl ,ೈiಾ @ಾವ8ನ /ರುವ ಆmೕ ೆ ಬರುವಂ;ೆ #Zaದರು. ಅದರಂ;ೆ %ಾನು ಮರು ನ ಆmೕ ೆ JೋV ಎಂಎ8ಎ gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¨sÉÃn ªÀiÁrzÁUÀ CªÀgÀÄ £À£ÀUÉ WÀ£À vÁådå ¸ÀAUÀæºÀuÉ PÉ®¸ÀzÀ ¸À®ÄªÁV 10 PÀ¸ÀzÀ ಆbೋ gಾಗಳನುE @ೊ3ಸುವl$ಾV ಈ ಸಂಬಂಧ ?ೕನು 20 ಲo ರೂ @ೊಡುವಂ;ೆ #Zaದರು. ಅದರಂ;ೆ %ಾನು ಎಂಎ8ಎ ರವರು #Zaದಂ;ೆ ಆbೋ gಾ @ೊ3ಸು;ಾ ೆಂಬ ನಂ_@ೆ`ಂದ 2 ನಗಳ ನಂತರ PೆEೕeತರುಗಳ ಬZ Pಾಲ Qಾ3 20 ಲo ರೂಗಳನುE ನಗದು ಮೂಲಕ ಎಂಎ8ಎ ಮು?ರತE ರವ ೆ @ೊಡಲು Jೋ$ಾಗ ಅವರು ಕXೇ ಯ /ದp ಅವರ ಗ Qಾ< ೆ @ೊಡುವಂ;ೆ #Zaದುp, ಈ ಹಣವನುE ಗ Qಾ< *ಜq ಕುQಾS ರವ ೆ ?ೕ3$ೆನು. ಇ$ಾದ 2 ನಗಳ ನಂತರ ಆbೋಗಳ ಬ ೆL ಎಂಎ8ಎ ರವರನುE * ಾ a$ಾಗ ಅವರು ನನ ೆ Jೆಚುsವ iಾV 10 ಆbೋಗಳನುE ?ೕಡುವಂ;ೆ tಾರಸುu ಪತ ವನುE ಮುಖ< ಆಯುಕರು, __ಎಂ[ ರವ ೆ ಬ ೆ ರು;ೇ%ೆಂದು #Za ಪತ ದ ಒಂದು ಪ #ಯನುE ನನ ೆ ?ೕ3ದರು. %ಾನು Jೊಸ ಆbೋ gಾಗಳನುE @ೊ3ಸು;ಾ ೆಂದು ಅವ ೆ 20 ಲo ರೂ. ಹಣವನುE ?ೕ3ದುp ಆದ ೆ ನನ ೆ ಬ ೕ tಾರಸುu ಪತ ವನುE ?ೕ3ದುp ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ಮು?ರತEರವರು ನನ ೆ kೕಸ Qಾ3ರು;ಾ ೆ.

ಜೂ -2023 ರಂದು Dಾಸಕ ಾದ ೕ ಮು?ರತEರವರು [ದೂ. ಸಂwೆ<: 9844400531] ನನ ೆ ೕ Qಾ3 ?ೕನು ಈ ಕೂಡ>ೇ ನಮx ಮ%ೆ ೆ ಾ Qಾತ%ಾqÉéÃಕು ಎಂದು JೇZ ತoಣ ೕ ಕ ೆಯನುE ಕy Qಾ3ದರು. ಆ ಸಮಯದ / ನನ ೆ ಮ;ೆ ಎಂಎ8ಎ ರವರು ಲಂಚದ ಹಣ @ೇಳಬಹು$ೆಂದು %ಾನು ಆ ನ ಅವರ ಮ%ೆ ೆ Jೋಗ ಲ/. ಇ$ಾದ ನಂತರ 14.08.2023 ರಂದು ಘನ ;ಾ<ಜ< *(ಾಗದ ಅz@ಾ ಗಳ{ ೕ ಮು?ರತEರವರ ಗೃಹಕXೇ ೆ 7ೕ}ೕಂ~ ೆ ಬರುವಂ;ೆ #Zaದರು. ಅದರಂ;ೆ %ಾನು

7ೕ}ಂ~ ೆ Jಾಜ ಾ$ೆನು. ಈ 7ೕ}ಂ~ ಮುVದ Mೕ>ೆ ಎಂ.ಎ8ಎ ಮು?ರತE ರವರು ನನEನುE ಪ ;ೆ<ೕಕ,ಾV ಅವರ ೇಂಬS ೆ ಕ ೆದು "ಎ>ೊ/ೕ Qಾಮೂ ಹಣ" ಎಂದು @ೇZದರು. ಆಗ %ಾನು ಕಷjದ /$ೆpೕ%ೆ ಈಗ ಹಣ ತಂ ರುವl ಲ/,ೆಂದು #Za$ಾಗ ಅವರು ನನ ೆ ಅ,ಾಚ< ಶಬpಗZಂದ ೈದರು Jಾಗೂ ಅ$ೇ ನ ಮು?ರತE ರವರು ನನ ೆ Pೇ ದ ಗಂ ಾ ಎಂಟSTೆUಸ ೆ ?ೕ3ರುವ @ೆಲಸದ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಗು# ೆ$ಾರರನುE ಬದ>ಾ`ಸುವ ಬ ೆL ಮುಖ< ಆಯುಕರು, _._.ಎಂ.[. ರವ ೆ ಪತ ಬ ೆಯಲು ತಮx ಸJಾಯಕ ೆ ಸೂ•aರು;ಾ ೆ. ಅವರು ''?ನEಮx ೋZಮಗ%ೇ, ?ನEಮx%ಾE@ೆಯ< Pಾಲ ತಂ$ಾದರೂ ಸ ಹಣ ತಂದು@ೊWೋ'' ಎಂದು ಅ,ಾಚ< ಶಬpಗZಂದ ನನE ಮತು ನನE ಕುಟುಂಬವನುE ?ಂ aದp ಂದ, %ಾನು ಮನ%ೊಂದು ನನE @ೆಲಸ ಕOೆದು@ೊಂಡ ೆ ಸಂPಾರ ನWೆಸುವlದು Jೇ ೆ ಎಂಬ ದುಃಖ ಂದ ಆತxಹ;ೆ< Qಾ3@ೊಳ{\ವವ ೆಗೂ •ೕ•a$ೆpನು.

PೆTೆjಂಬS-2023 ರ / ಎಂಎ8ಎ ರವರ [ಎ ಅ‚ƒೇ6 (ದೂ. ಸಂwೆ<: 8105328927] ರವರು ನನ ೆ „ೕ Qಾ3 ಎಂಎ8ಎ PಾJೇಬರು ಬರುವಂ;ೆ JೇZರು;ಾ ೆ ಎಂದು #Zaದುp, ನಂತರ ಮರು ನ %ಾನು ,ೈiಾ< @ಾವ8ನ /ರುವ ಕXೇ ಯ / Dಾಸಕ ಾದ ೕ ಮು?ರತEರವರನುE ಭಯ ಂದ>ೇ (ೇ} Qಾ3ದುp, ಆಗ ಅವರು ನನ ೆ ?ೕನು ಎಷುj ವಷ.ಗZಂದ ,ಾ-. ನಂ. 42, ಲcd$ೇ*ನಗರ ,ಾ-. ನ / 3. $ೇವ ಾಜು ಅರಸು ಟ 6 ಟ7.ನ8 ಪ $ೇಶದ ಘನ ;ಾ<ಜ< ಸಂಗ ಹ=ೆ ಮತು *>ೇ,ಾ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಎಷುj ಸಮಯ ಂದ @ೆಲಸ Qಾಡು# pೕiಾ ಎಂದು @ೇZದುp, ಅದ@ೆN %ಾನು ಸQಾರು 3 ವಷ.ಗZಂದ Qಾಡು#ರುವl$ಾV #Zaದುp, ಅದ@ೆN "ಅವರು 3 ವಷ. ಅಂದ ೆ 36 #ಂಗಳ{ ಆ`ತು. ಈ @ೆಲಸದ ಸಲು,ಾV ನನ ೆ ಪ # #ಂಗಳ{ 1 ಲoದಂ;ೆ 36 ಲo ಆಗು;ೆ. ಆದ ೆ ?ೕನು 30 ಲo ®AZÀ @ೊಡು" ಎಂದು ೇ3@ೆ ಇ}jರು;ಾ ೆ. ಅದ@ೆN %ಾನು %ಾನು "ಅ=ಾ‡ 30 ®PÀë PÉÆqÀ®Ä DUÀÄªÀÅ¢®è, 15 ®PÀë J°èAzÁzÀgÀÆ ¸Á® ªÀiÁr vÀAzÀÄ PÉÆqÀÄwÛÃ¤" JAzÀÄ ºÉÃ½zÉ, DUÀ®Æ ¸ÀºÀ CªÀgÀÄ CªÁZÀå ±À§ÞUÀ½AzÀ £À£ÀUÉ ¨Á¬ÄUÉ §AzÀAvÉ ¨ÉÊzÀÄ ¨ÉÃUÀ ºÀt vÀAzÀÄ PÉÆqÀÄ JAzÀÄ ºÉÃ½ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

ನಂತರ 2023ರ ಸTೆjಂಬS #ಂಗಳ / ಒಂದು ನ ವಸಂತ ಕುQಾS ಎಂಬುವವರು ಲcd$ೇ*ನಗರದ / %ಾನು @ೆಲಸ Qಾಡು#ರು,ಾಗ ಬಂದು " ¯ÉÃAiÀiï, CeÉðAmÁV JAJ¯ïJ ಮು?ರತEರವರನುE Qಾತ%ಾ3a@ೊಂಡು ಾ, ಇಲ/,ಾದ ೆ ?ನE ಗ ಹ ಾರ %ೆಟjVರುವl ಲ/ ಎಂದು ೆದ @ೆ Jಾˆರು;ಾ ೆ" Jಾ ಾV %ಾನು ಮರು ನ ಮು?ರತEರವರನುE ಭಯ ಂದ (ೇ} Qಾ3$ಾಗ ಅವರು ನನ ೆ "ಹಣ ತಂ$ೆ%ೋ" ಎಂದು @ೇZದರು. ಅದ@ೆN %ಾನು ಈಗ ತಂ ಲ/ @ೊ3ೕ? ಸS ಎಂ$ಾಗ, @ೋಪ ೊಂಡ ಮು?ರತEರವರು ನನE ಮುಖ@ೆN ಮನಬಂದಂ;ೆ ಥZa "%ಾನು ಎಂ.ಎ8.ಎ 5 ವಷ. ಇರು;ೇ%ೆ, ?ೕನು ಕ ೆPÁÖV ನನE ಹತ JೇZದಂ ೆ ನWೆದು@ೊಂಡು ದುಡುŠ ತಂದು @ೊಟj ೆ ?ನ ೆ @ೆಲಸ Qಾಡಲು _ಡು;ೇ%ೆ. ಇಲ/ ಅಂದ ೆ %ಾನು ?ನE bೆಂಡSನುE @ಾ<ನu8 Qಾ3. ನನ ೆ ೇ@ಾದವ ೆ bೆಂಡS @ೊ3ಸು;ೇ%ೆ, %ಾನು ಎಂ.ಎ8.ಎ ಕ=ೋ, ಏನು ೇ@ಾದರೂ Qಾಡಲು ನನ ೆ ಅz@ಾರ ಇ$ೆ ಎಂದು ೆದ @ೆ Jಾˆದರು. ಅದ@ೆN %ಾನು ಇಲ/ ಅ=ಾ‡, ಸCಲ! ಸಮಯ ?ೕ3. ?ೕವl JೇZದಂ;ೆ ನWೆದು@ೊಳ{\#ೕ? ಎಂದು #Zaರು;ೇ%ೆ.

ಇ$ಾದ ನಂತರ %ಾನು ಹಣ @ೊಡ$ೇ ಇದುpದp ಂದ ನ,ೆಂಬS-2023 #ಂಗZನ / ವಲಯ ಆಯುಕರು, ಾಜ ಾ"ೇಶC ನಗರ ವಲಯ ರವ ೆ ,ಾ-. ನಂ. 42 ಲcd$ೇ*ನಗರ ,ಾ-. ನ / ಘನ;ಾ<ಜ< ?ವ.ಹ=ೆ, ಸಂಗ ಹ=ೆ ಮತು *>ೇ,ಾ @ಾಯ.ಗಳನುE ಗು# ೆ$ಾರ%ಾದ %ಾನು ಸ iಾV ?ವ.eಸು#ಲ/,ೆಂದು, ನನE ಕಂಪ?ಯ ಗು# ೆಯನುE ರದುpQಾ3 ಈ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಕೂಡ>ೇ ತು;ಾ.V 7 ನಗಳ ಅ>ಾ!ವz bೆಂಡS ಕ ೆದು @ಾiಾ.$ೇಶ ?ೕಡಲು __ಎಂ[ ಮುಖ< ಆಯುಕರವ ೆ ನನE ಗು# ೆ ಕಂಪ? *ರುದŒ ಪತ ಬ ೆ ರು;ಾ ೆ.

ಮ;ೆ 16.11.2023 ರಂದು ನನE *ರುದŒ ಸ iಾV ,ಾ-.ನ / @ೆಲಸ ?ವ.eಸು#ಲ/,ೆಂದು ದೂರು ?ೕ3ರು;ಾ ೆ. ಅದರಂ;ೆ ಸJಾಯಕ ಪ fಾನ ವ<ವPಾ•ಪಕರು, ಾಜ ಾ"ೇಶC ನಗರ *(ಾಗ, ೆಂಗಳ ರು ಘನ;ಾ<ಜ< ?ವ.ಹ=ಾ ?ಯ7ತ ರವರು ನನ ೆ ಅಗತ< ಕ ಮ ವea Žತ ರೂಪದ / ವರ ?ೕಡುವಂ;ೆ ಸೂ•aರು;ಾ ೆ.

ಈ ೕ# ಹಲ,ಾರು ಪತ ಗಳನುE __ಎಂ[ ಅz@ಾ ಗZ ೆ ಬ ೆದು ನನE ಗು# ೆಯನುE ರದುpQಾಡಲು ಮು?ರತEರವರು @ೋ ದುp, ಇದರ ಸಲು,ಾV __ಎಂ[ ಅz@ಾ ಗಳ{ ನನE ,ಾ-.ನುE ತTಾಸ=ೆ Qಾ3ರು;ಾ ೆ.

%ಾಂಕ 17.05.2024 ರಂದು ಸJಾಯಕ @ಾಯ.Tಾಲಕ ಅ‚ಯಂತರ ಾದ ೕ ವರ%ಾ ಾಯ• ರವರು ನನ ೆ ಕ ೆ Qಾ3 9 ,ಾ-.ಗಳ ಗು# ೆ$ಾರ ೆ TಾOೆ ೆZ ೆL Dಾಸಕರ ಗೃಹ ಕXೇ ಯ / 7ೕ}ಂ~ ಕ ೆ ದುp Jಾಜ ಾಗುವಂ;ೆ #Zaರು;ಾ ೆ. ಅದರಂ;ೆ ¢£ÁAPÀ: 18.05.2024 ರಂದು ೆZ ೆL ಸುQಾರು 9-00 ಗಂbೆ ಸಮಯ@ೆN %ಾನು ,ೈiಾ @ಾವ¯ï£À°ègÀÄªÀ ±Á¸ÀPÀgÀ UÀÈಹ ಕXೇ ೆ JೋVರು;ೇ%ೆ. ಆಗ ಮು?ರತEರವರು ನನEನುE ಅವರ wಾಸV bÉAಬS ೆ ಕ ೆ`a "@ಾಸು vÀA¢¢Ýh%ೋ ಎಂದು @ೇZದುp ಅದ@ೆN %ಾನು ಇಲ/ @ೊಡು;ೇ%ೆ ಎಂದು JೇZ$ಾಗ ಎಂಎ8ಎ ಮು?ರತEರವರು ನನ ೆ ?ನEಮx @ೆ`PೊNೕಂ- Mೕ>ೆ @ೊ3ೕiಾ, ?ನEಮx iಾ ಾದರೂ ಅಡ ಇಟುj ತಂದು@ೊWೋ, ೇ ೆ ೇ ೆಯವ ೆ ಮಲಗುaಯ>ೊ/ೕ, ನನ ೆ ಮಲUÉÆìÃ, ಏ ೌಡ ;ಾ%ೇ ?ೕನು, ಆ ಸೂOೆ ಮಗನ "ೊ;ೆ iಾ@ೋ Pೇ $ೆ, ಆ Jೊ>ೆಯನ "ೊ;ೆ, (QಾK @ಾ ೕ. ೇಟS ,ೇಲು %ಾಯಕS ರವರನುE ಉ$ೆpೕ a) ಒಬ' ೌಡ ಆVೕ iಾ@ೋ Jೊ>ೆಯನ PಾQÛÃiಾ, Jೇ ಲವWೇ @ೇ ಾ8, ಸೂOೆ ಮಗ%ೇ %ಾನು 5 ವಷ. ಎಂಎ8ಎ ಕ=ೋ, ?ನ ೆ %ೆಮx ಇಲ/ದಂ ೆ Qಾಡಆˆj3ೕ?, _3ೕ%ಾ ?ನE ಸುಮx%ೆ, ಇದಲ/, ಇನೂE ನೂರು Tಾ/ ನ / ? ಕ;ೆ ಮುVaೕ?, ಅವನವC ಆ Jೊ>ೆಯ ಸೂOೆ ಮಗನ @ೈಯ< / ಏ%ಾಗು;ೋ, ?%ಾEಮxನE@ೆಯ< ಏ Qಾತ%ಾ3 p•ೕ ಅದನE ತ ೊಂಡು ಾ ೋ, ನ3•ೕ>ೆ ಸೂOೆ ಮಗ%ೇ ಎಂದು @ೆಟj @ೆbಾj$ಾV ಅ,ಾಚ< ಶಬpಗZಂದ ?ಂ a ಅವರು @ೈ`ಂದ ನನE ತ>ೆ ೆ JೊWೆದು, ೆದ a ಕಳ{eaದರು. ಅದನುE %ಾನು ಆ3•ೕ ೆ@ಾ3ಂ.~ ªÀiÁrPÉÆArgÀÄvÉÛÃ£É. EzÉ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è «dAiÀiïPÀÄªÀiÁgï, C©µÉÃPï £À£Àß ªÉÄÃ¯É ºÀ¯Éè ªÀiÁrzÀgÀÄ."

A perusal at the complaint would indicate that demand for money

began on 05-07-2019. Every paragraph is indicative of the years of

allegations against the petitioner. It travels from 05-07-2019 and

stops at 08-08-2024. This exactly forms the fulcrum of the lis.

Therefore, it is not the case where the incident of 05-07-2019 alone

is complained of on 13-09-2024. The offence continued for five

years. Being allegedly fed up of the torture, the

complainant/informant comes forward to register the crime.

Therefore, the investigation is not hit by delay. Thus, falls the first

ground urged by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner.

10. The next submission is with regard to constitution of SIT.

As observed hereinabove, there were three crimes registered

against the petitioner even including the offence of rape. The

investigation was initially handed over to the CID. Later, the State

Government thought it fit to constitute a SIT of the CID to

investigate into the crime. The order dated 21-09-2024 of the

constitution of the SIT reads as follows:

"ಪ Pಾವ%ೆ:-

Mೕ>ೆ ಓದ>ಾದ (1) ಮತು (2)ರ / ದೂರು$ಾರರು ತಮ ೆ "ಾ# ?ಂದ%ೆ Qಾ3 ಅ,ಾಚ< ಶಬpಗZಂದ ೈದು, ಹ>ೆ/ Qಾ3 Jಾಗೂ ಲಂಚ@ಾNV ೇ3@ೆ ಇ}jರುವ ಕು ತು ೕ ಮು?ರತE Dಾಸಕರು Jಾಗೂ ಇತರರ *ರುದŒ ೆಂಗಳ ರು ನಗರ ªÉÊAiÀiÁ°PÁªÀ¯ï ¥ÉÆ°Ã¸ï oÁuÉAiÀÄ°è Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ªÉÆPÀzÀÝªÉÄ ¸ÀASÉå:121/2024 PÀ®A 506, 504, , 385, 420, 323 gÉ/* 34 L¦¹ Jಾಗೂ ˆ 7ನ8 ªÉÆPÀzÀÝªÉÄ ¸ÀASÉå: : 122/2024, PÀ®A 153 (J)(1)(J)(©), 509, 504, 153 L¦¹ Jಾಗೂ PÀ®A 3(1)(Dgï)(J¸ï) ಪ ಷj eÁw ಮತು ಪ ಷj ಪಂಗಡ ($ೌಜ.ನ< ತWೆ) @ಾhp ರ3 %ಾಂಕ:13.09.2024 ರಂದು ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ{ $ಾಖ>ಾVರುತ$ೆ.

Mೕ>ೆ ಓದ>ಾದ (3)ರ / ಮeOೆ•ಬ'ರ ದೂ ನ Mೕ ೆ ೆ ೕ ಮು?ರತE, Dಾಸಕರು, Jಾಗೂ ಇತರರ *ರುದŒ ಾಮನಗರ K>ೆ/, ಕಗL ೕಪlರ ೕ "ಾ=ೆಯ / Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ªÉÆPÀzÀÝªÉÄ ¸ÀASÉå:: 312/2024, PÀ®A 354(J), 354(¹), 376(2)( (J£ï), 506, 504, 120(©), 149, 384, 406, 308 L¦¹ ಮತು PÀ®A 66, 66(E) L.n PÁAiÉÄÝ-2000 gÀr %ಾಂಕ:18.09.2024ರಂದು ¥Àæಕರಣವl $ಾಖ>ಾVರುತ$ೆ.

ಸ@ಾ.ರವl ಈ MೕಲNಂಡ ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ ಗಂ‚ೕರ;ೆಯನುE ಪ ಗ"a, ಈ ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ ಸಮಗ ತ?wೆಯನುE @ೈ ೊಳ\ಲು ಾಜ<ದ *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ಸಂPೆ•iಾದ aಐ3ಯ ಒಂದು *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡ (Special Investigation Team)ವನುE ರ•ಸುವlದು ಸೂಕ,ೆಂದು #ೕQಾ.?a ಈ @ೆಳಕಂಡಂ;ೆ ಆ$ೇ a$ೆ.

ಸ@ಾ.ರದ ಆ$ೇಶ ಸಂwೆ<: Jೆ-3 142 aಒ3 2024, ೆಂಗಳ ರು, %ಾಂಕ:21/09/2024.

ಪ Pಾವ%ೆಯ / *ವ aರುವ ಅಂಶಗಳ e%ೆE>ೆಯ / Dಾಸಕ ಾದ ೕ ಮು?ರತE Jಾಗೂ ಇತರರ *ರುದŒ ೆಂಗಳ ರು ನಗರ ,ೈiಾ @ಾವ8 ೕ "ಾ=ೆಯ / ˆ 7ನ8 kಕದpM ಸಂwೆ<: 121/2024, PÀ®A 506, 504, 385, 420, 323 gÉ/* 34 L¦¹ ೆಂಗಳ ರು ನಗರ ,ೈiಾ< @ಾವ8 ೕ "ಾ=ೆಯ / ˆ 7ನ8 kಕದpM ಸಂwೆ<. 122/2024, PÀ®A 153 (J)(1)(J)(©), 509, 504, 153 L¦¹ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ಾಮನಗರ K>ೆ/, ಕಗL ೕಪlರ ೕ "ಾ=ೆಯ / ˆ 7ನ8 kಕದpM ಸಂwೆ<: 312/2024, ಕಲಂ 354(ಎ) 354(¹), 376(2)( J£ï), 506, 504, 120(©), 149, 384, 406, 308 L¦¹ ಕಲಂ 66, 66(E) ಐ.} @ಾhp-2000 ರ3 $ಾಖ>ಾVರುವ ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ ಕು ತು ಸಮಗ ತ?wೆಯನುE @ೈ ೊಳ\ಲು ಾಜ<ದ *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ಸಂPೆ•iಾದ aಐ3ಯ ಈ @ೆಳಕಂಡ e ಯ ೕ ಅz@ಾ ಗಳ%ೊEಳ ೊಂಡ ಒಂದು *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡ (Special Investigation Team)ವನುE ರ•a ಸ@ಾ.ರವl ಆ$ೇ a$ೆ.

1. ೕ _. @ೆ. aಂ~. ಐ.[.ಎ . ಮುಖ<ಸ•ರು ಅ¥Àರ ೕ ಮJಾ ?$ೇ.ಶಕರು, ಆ˜.ಕ ಅಪ ಾಧಗಳ{, a.ಐ.3. ೆಂಗಳ ರು

2. ೕ ಲಭು ಾ™ ಐ.[.ಎ . ಸದಸ<ರು ೕ ಮJಾ? ೕoಕರು, @ೇಂದ ವಲಯ, ೆಂಗಳ ರು.

3. ೕಮ# Pೌಮ<ಲತ ಐ.[.ಎ . ಸದಸ<ರು ೕ ಅzೕoಕರು, ೈ>ೆCೕ , ೆಂಗಳ ರು.

4. ೕ a.ಎ.Pೈಮ , ಸದಸ<ರು ೕ ಅzೕoಕರು, (ಪ ಸುತ ಸ•ಳ? ೕo=ೆ),

MೕಲNಂಡ ಮೂರು ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ{ Pೇ ದಂ;ೆ Jಾಗೂ ಈ ಸಂಬಂಧ MೕಲNಂಡ Dಾಸಕರು Jಾಗೂ ಇತರರ *ರುದŒ ಾಜ<ದ ಇತ ೆ ೕ "ಾ"ಗಳ / $ಾಖ>ಾದ /$ಾಖ¯Áಗಬಹು$ಾದ ಎ>ಾ/ ಪ ಕರಣಗಳನುE ಮJಾ?$ೇ.ಶಕರು ಮತು Dರoಕ ಮJಾ? ೕoಕರು ಈ *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡ (Special Investigation Team)PÉÌ ವ ಾ.`ಸುವlದು Jಾಗೂ *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡ@ೆN ಅವಶ<*ರುವ ಇತ ೆ ಸದಸ<ರುಗಳ{, ಅz@ಾ ಗಳ{ / aಬ'ಂ ಗಳ ಅವಶ<ಕ;ೆ ಇದp / ಮJಾ ?$ೇ.ಶಕರು ಮತು ಆರoಕ ಮJಾ? ೕoಕರು, ೆಂಗಳ ರು ರವರ ಅನುkೕದ%ೆ•ಂ ೆ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡ@ೆN Pೇ a@ೊಳ{\ವlದು.

*Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡವl (Special Investigation Team) aಐ3ಯ / ಲಭ<*ರುವ ಸಂಪನೂxಲಗಳನುE ಬಳa@ೊಳ{\ವlದು.

ೕ ಮJಾ ?$ೇ.ಶಕರು, aಐ3, ರವರ Mೕ C ಾರ=ೆಯ / ಈ *Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡ (Special Investigation Team)ವl @ಾಯ. ?ವ.eಸುವlದು.

*Dೇಷ ತ?wಾ ತಂಡವl MೕಲNಂಡ ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ{ Jಾಗೂ MೕಲNಂಡ Dಾಸಕರುಗಳ *ರುದŒ $ಾಖ>ಾಗುವ ಇತ ೆ ಎ>ಾ/ ಪ ಕರಣಗಳ ಸಮಗ ತ?wೆಯನುE ನWೆa, ತ?wಾ ವರ ಯನುE ಮJಾ ?$ೇ.ಶಕರು ಮತು ಆರoಕ ಮJಾ? ೕoಕರು, ೆಂಗಳ ರು ರವರ ಮುwಾಂತರ ೕಘ ,ಾV ಸ@ಾ.ರ@ೆN ಸ /ಸತಕNದು."

The contention of the learned senior counsel that the head of the

SIT is from CID and others are not is contrary to records. It is an

admitted fact that the head of the SIT is from CID. CID is a

Department in the Criminal Investigation System of the State. It is

a Criminal Investigation Department like several other departments

namely COD etc. There are two types of officers who man the CID -

one directly recruited to the CID; they are called as the detectives

and only those detectives are permanent employees of the CID. All

other officers are drawn from the general Police wing of the State

by transfer, deputation or any other mode. It is in public domain

that except those detectives, all other officers are from general

Police. Therefore, the submission that the head of the SID is from

CID and others are not, apart from being factually incorrect, is a

legally untenable statement.

11. It is the submission of the learned Additional State Public

Prosecutor that other three members are also deputationists in the

CID. This submission is not disputed, but the contention is that they

should be from CID. I decline to accept this submission, as SIT can

be constituted to a crime of officers drawn from different

Departments. Merely because the Government order refers to a

SIT of the CID it does not mean that it gets vitiated on account of

other teammates in the SIT being drawn from other sources. The

Head of the investigation team is from CID is an admitted fact. The

others would be to assist the head. Therefore, the submission that

there is a flaw in the constitution of SIT, is itself a flawed

submission and sans countenance.

12. The second part of the submission is that SIT is directed

to furnish its report to the Government and not before Court of law,

therefore, it is vitiated or investigation gets vitiated. This

submission is again unacceptable as, considering an identical

circumstance, the coordinate Bench in IDEYA VENDAN supra has

held as follows:

".... .... ....

36) As noticed supra, it is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that CID Police had no jurisdiction to file the charge sheet before the jurisdictional Magistrate since they were directed by the Government to submit a report to the Government, as such, the charge sheets filed are without jurisdiction. I find no substance in this contention. The Government in exercise of its power of superintendence over the Police Force and having regard to the seriousness of the allegations made involving huge sums of public money,

transferred the investigation to CID Police. Of course, in the notification, the CID was directed to complete the investigation at an early date and take steps to submit the report to the Government. This direction in my considered opinion, does not come in the way of the power of the CID Police as officers-in-charge of the police station to file final report in terms of Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. on completion of investigation. The Government notification does not preclude the CID Police from exercising the power vested in the Investigating Officer to file final report under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. to the jurisdictional court. In every case registered in respect of cognizable offences under Section 154 of Cr.P.C., the officer-in-charge of the police station having jurisdiction to investigate, is empowered to proceed with the investigation and on completion of investigation to form opinion as to whether on the materials collected, there is a case to place the accused before the Magistrate for trial and if so, to take necessary steps for the same by filing a charge sheet under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. The Apex Court in Ashok Kumar Todi's case referred to supra, in Paragraph-49 has set-out various steps contemplated by Code of Criminal Procedure to be carried-out during investigation, which reads as under:-

49. The Code contemplates the following steps to be carried-out during such investigation:-

     i)     proceeding to the spot;

     ii)    ascertainment of the facts and circumstances of the
            case;

iii) discovery and arrest of the suspected offender;

iv) collection of evidence relating to the commission of the offence which may consist of-

a) The examination of various persons (including the accused) and the reduction of their statements into writing, if the officer thinks fit,

b) The search of places or seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and to be produced at the trial; and

v) formation of opinion as to whether on the material collected there is a case to place the accused before a Magistrate for trial and, if so, to take necessary steps for the same by filing of charge sheet under Section 173."

Therefore, in the light of the above, it cannot be said that the CID Police had no competence to file charge sheet under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. Having regard to the fact that the Government transferred the investigation to CID police, the CID police assumed the status of officer-in-charge of the police empowered to take all necessary steps as contemplated by the Code regarding investigation of the case including the power to form final opinion and to place the charge sheet before the jurisdictional court. Merely because, in the notification issued by the Government, CID was directed to submit a report to the Government, it cannot be interpreted that the CID police had no jurisdiction to file the charge sheet in terms of Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C.. The direction so contained in notification will have to be construed as a direction to CID to submit a status report to the Government as to the action taken by it in respect of the investigation of the case entrusted to it. In this view of the matter, I find no substance in the said contention and accordingly, it is rejected."

(Emphasis supplied)

The coordinate bench holds that merely because an order

constituting SIT of the CID and directing submission of the report to

the Government would not mean that it would get vitiated. The

CID would also have power to file it before the concerned Court.

This submission also is steered clear by the very Notification

declaring the CID to be a police station. The Notification dated

12-01-2024 reads as follows:

"GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

No.HD/94/POP/2023 Karnataka Government Secretariat Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore, dated 12-01-2024.

NOTIFICATION

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (s) of Section 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Central Act- 2 of 1974), and in supersession of earlier order or notification issued in this regard, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) an unit of Karnataka Police Department is declared and notified as police station for the entire territory of the State of Karnataka.

The Police Inspector rank officer of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) will be the Station House Officer and Officer in-charge of Police Station for the purpose of provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (Central Act-2 of 1974) relating to the criminal cases referred by the Government of Karnataka, the Supreme Court or the High Court or the Director General and Inspector general of Police, Karnataka State for the purpose of investigation and to register criminal cases in cognizable offences made out of enquiries to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) by the Government of Karnataka, the Supreme Court of India or the High Court or the Director General and Inspector General of Police, Karnataka State.

By order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka, Sd/-

(K.N.VANAJA), 12/1/24 Under Secretary to Government, Home Department (Police Expenditure)."

In the light of the judgment and the notification supra the second

submission that the Government order runs contrary to law is

unacceptable. I find no merit in the submission as, on and from

12-01-2024, CID is declared to be the police station. The said

ground also tumbles down. In all, the petition is meritless. It being

meritless, should necessarily meet its rejection.

Petition accordingly stands rejected. Interim order, if any

operating, shall stand dissolved.

SD/-

____________________ JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA