IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2645/2019 BETWEEN:
1. ABHILESH J S/O S.N. JAYAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS NO.91, 5TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN HANUMANTHANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 019.
2. DILLI RAJAN S/O NAGARAJAN AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS FLAT NO.202, KAMALA RESIDENCY, 3RD CROSS RBI COLONY, JAYANAGAR 3RD BLOCK EAST BENGALURU - 560 011.
3. DEEPAK S SARANGMATH S/O S.S. SARANGMATH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.133 2ND MAIN, THALAGHATTAPURA KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU – 560 109.
4. JAYSHAM JAYASIMHA S/O M.B. JAYASIMHA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.62 AUDUMBARA 1ST MAIN HAPPY VALLEY LAYOUT POORNAPRAJNANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 061.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS RAO S.S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ADUGODI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY S.P.P. HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SRI. KUMAR VEL AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS BBMP SENIOR HEALTH INSPECTOR, BTM LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560 061.
(BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP) ... RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED BY THE ADUGODI POLICE IN CR.NO.43/2019, AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 353, 186, 188, 504 AND 34 OF THE IPC, BASED ON THE WRITTEN INFORMATION DATED:16.03.2019, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE VI A.C.M.M., BANGALORE CITY.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioners who have been arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 4 in Crime No. 43/2019 registered by Audugodi Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 353, 186, 188, 504 read with Section 34 IPC are before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
2. A complaint came to be lodged by second respondent before the jurisdictional police alleging that on 16.03.2019 while he was on election duty between 1.20 a.m. and 1.50 a.m., a Honda Jazz car bearing registration No. KA-01-MQ 3533 was intercepted for the purpose of checking and at that point of time, inmates of the vehicle i.e., petitioners had abused and questioned the authority of the complainant and the police constable who was assisting the complainant as to their right to interrupt the vehicle, checking the vehicle and therby not only prevented them from discharging their duties, but also used criminal force against complainant and police official. Hence, complainant sought for suitable action being taken against accused persons. Said complaint came to be registered in Crime No.43/2019 for the offences aforestated.
3. I have heard the arguments of Sri.
Srinivas Rao, learned Advocate appearing for petitioners and Sri S Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent-1-State. Perused the records.
4. Sri Srinivas Rao, learned Advocate appearing for petitioners is correct in contending that registration of FIR for the offence punishable under Sections 186 and 188 IPC is contrary to Section 195 Cr.P.C., inasmuch as, for invoking said provision, complaint has to be lodged by a competent officer as indicated under Section 195 Cr.P.C and on the basis of a police report, cognizance of the offence cannot be taken. A plain reading of Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C.
would clearly indicate that offences punishable under Sections 172 to 188 IPC (both inclusive), jurisdictional Court would not take cognizance of the offence except on a complaint in writing by a public servant concerned or other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate. Hence, if the prosecution is continued against petitioners for the said offences, it would be contrary to Section 195 Cr.P.C. and on the basis of the same, prosecution cannot be continued insofar as offences punishable under Sections 186 & 188 IPC are concerned.
5. Apart from the above stated facts, today, learned Advocate appearing for petitioners has filed a joint affidavit of petitioners-1 to 4 whereunder they have expressed remorse for questioning the authority of second respondent – complainant in checking their vehicle. Said joint affidavit is placed on record.
6. Based on the omnibus statement, primafacie, ingredients of the offence alleged cannot be made out against petitioners. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that continuation of proceedings against petitioners would not be just and proper.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER (i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioners in Crime No.43/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 353, 186, 188, 504 read with Section 34 IPC, pending on the file of VI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is hereby quashed and petitioners are acquitted of the aforesaid offences.
*sp SD/- JUDGE