IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P. S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.27768/2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
DR. PRABHAKAR BHAT, S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT 1-185 KALADKA, GOLTHIMAJALU, KALADKA, D.K. - 574 222. ... PETITIONER (By Sri ARUNA SHYAM M., ADVOCATE ) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH KONAJE POLICE STATION, MANGALORE, D.K., REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. DR. YOGISH S. B., FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT JAGRUTHA DALA, FS-3, 204, MANGALORE - 575 001. ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri.S.RACHAIAH, HCGP. ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.172/2019 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMF, BANTWAL, D.K. INCLUDING THE COMPLAINT, F.I.R. AND CHARGE SHEET IN CRIME NO.058/2018 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE ON THE FILE OF THE S.C.J. (S.D) AND J.M.F.C. COURT, BANTWALA, DAKSHINA KANNADA, BANTWALA TALUK, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 153A OF IPC AND U/S 125 OF REPRESENTATION OF PEOPLE ACT, PRODUCED AS ANNEXURES-A, C, B AND D RESPECTIVELY.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Order Petitioner has taken exception to order dated 19.03.2019 by which learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 153A IPC and Section 125 of Representation of People Act.
2. Sri Aruna Shyam, learned advocate for the petitioner urged a solitary contention that the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance under Section 153A IPC without an express sanction by the competent authority. He submitted that the impugned order does not disclose that sanction was accorded by the competent authority to take cognizance and to proceed further. He further submitted that the sanction order has not been annexed to the charge sheet. So far as other charge for the offence punishable under Section 125 of Representation of People Act is concerned, learned advocate for petitioner submitted that there are no ingredients in the complaint inasmuch as no untoward incident has been recorded in the charge sheet.
3. Sri Rachaiah, learned High Court Government Pleader, in his usual fairness, did not dispute the facts so far as offence punishable under Section 153A IPC. So far as offence punishable under Section 125 of Representation of People Act, he argued in support of the charge sheet.
4. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the records.
5. Learned advocate for petitioner is right in his submission that no Court can take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 153A IPC without express sanction. The impugned order dated 19.03.2019 does not disclose that learned Magistrate is satisfied that sanction was accorded. Sanction order is not annexed to the charge sheet. Therefore, taking cognizance of offence punishable under Section 153A IPC is unsustainable in law.
6. So far as Section 125 of Representation of People Act is concerned, though it is a non-cognizable offence, the same has been investigated into along with Section 153A IPC. A careful perusal of the complaint does not disclose any untoward incident. The charge sheet does not disclose the ingredients of Section 125 of Representation of People Act. In the circumstances, the said charge is also untenable.
7. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. All proceedings in C.C.No.172/2019 against the petitioner are quashed.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE PKS