IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9184/2018 BETWEEN:
MR.CHETHAN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. NANJUNDACHAR, PRESENTLY R/AT NO.82, 2ND FLOOR, 7TH CROSS, 6TH BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560072 (BY SRI.VIJAYA KUMAR K, ADVOCATE) AND:
...PETITIONER 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE ANNAPOORNESHWARINAGARA POLICE STATION, REP. BY SPECIAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, KARNATAKA -560 001 2. MR. SRIRAM AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, S/O.B.RAMESHAN, NO.101, 1ST FLOOR, SIRI RESIDENCY, PAPANNA LAYOUT, V.NAGENAHALLI, RT NAGAR, BENGALURU-560032 (BY SRI.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP FOR R-1) ... RESPONDENTS THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 31.10.2018, PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (CCH- 67) IN CRL.RP NO.418/2018; AND DIRECT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO RECOVER/SEIZE THE CAR BEARING NO.KA-01 ML 9115 AND OTHER VALUABLES AS DETAILED IN THE COMPLAINT MEMORANDUM (VIDE ANNEXURE-A) FROM THE ILLEGAL CUSTODY OF THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 AND PRODUCE BEFORE THE LEARNED V ACMM AT BANGALORE IN CRIME NO.233/2017.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Application filed by the petitioner/complainant under Section 94 of Cr.P.C. seeking direction to the jurisdictional police to seize the car bearing No.KA-01- ML-9115 and other belongings of the complainant, which are said to be in the custody of accused, has been rejected and affirmed by the learned District Judge in Crl.R.P.No.418/2018 on 31.10.2018 and same is under challenge in this petition.
2. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties namely, Sri. Vijay Kumar K, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for first respondent-State, it is noticed from the records that petitioner herein had filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging that accused persons had forcibly taken away his car and other belongings without authority of law and despite complaint being lodged to the jurisdictional police, they have not received the same. Said complaint came to be referred by the learned Magistrate under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation and when the matter is at the stage of investigation, application in question has been filed.
3. As rightly observed by the learned trial Judge, which has been affirmed by the Revisional Court, it is not for the Courts to step into the shoes of investigating officer to direct the manner, mode and method in which investigation is to be conducted and as such, application has been rightly rejected. Hence, this Court is of the considered view there is no good ground to entertain this petition and accordingly, petition stands rejected.
SD/-
JUDGE DR