Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Mr Hariraj Shetty vs Director General And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|26 July, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.14015 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
MR. HARIRAJ SHETTY S/O B.VASANTHRAM SHETTY NO.15, BASEMENT CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU-560 052 ... PETITIONER (BY SHRI. AKASH B. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. DIRECTOR GENERAL & INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE POLICE HEAD QUARTERS NRUPATUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-01 2. HOME SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-01 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD BANGALORE-01 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE (CCB) N.T.PET, MYSORE ROAD BANGALORE-560 00 5. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BASAVESHWARANAGAR POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-01 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.0119/2017 UNDER SECTIONS 79, 80 OF THE K.P. ACT 1963 BEFORE THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT [TRAFFIC COURT 4] NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE [ANNEXURE-A] AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard Shri Akash B. Shetty, learned advocate for petitioner and Shri K.N. Nageshwarappa, learned HCGP for respondents.
2. Petitioner has challenged proceedings initiated against him for violation of Sections 79 & 80 of Karnataka Police Act, 1963, alleging that he was involved in gambling.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the said offences are non-cognizable and the learned Magistrate has granted permission without applying his mind. He has made available a copy of requisition submitted by the Station House Officer of Basaveshwara Nagar Police Station. A perusal of the said requisition shows that the learned Magistrate has endorsed as ‘permitted’. No reasons are recorded for granting permission.
4. This Court has taken a consistent view that a mere endorsement made by the learned Magistrate as ‘permitted’ without recording reasons is not a speaking order. [See- The Padubidri Members Lounge and others Vs. Director General and Inspector General of Police and others (W.Ps.No.42073- 42075/2018 D.D. 3.10.2018)].
5. In the circumstances, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. All proceedings in Crime No.119/2017 registered in Basaveshwara Nagar Police Station, pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic Court - 6, Bengaluru, are quashed so far as petitioner is concerned.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mr Hariraj Shetty vs Director General And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
26 July, 2019
Judges
  • P S Dinesh Kumar