IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL NO.1428 OF 2019 (GM-POLICE) Between:
Mrs.Jyothsna Bangara W/o. D.J.Bangara Aged abut 64 years Residing at No.249 4th Cross, Koramangala Bangalore-560 034.
Also at:
Green fields P.O. Aivernad Sullia Taluk-574 245. ... Appellant (By Sri. Raj Prabhu S., Advocate [absent]) And:
1. The Principal Secretary Department of Home Government of Karnataka Vidhana Soudha Dr. Ambedkar Veedhi Bangalore-560 001.
2. The Investigation Officer Sullia Police Station Sullia, Dakshina Kannada-574212.
3. The Investigation Officer Crime Investigation Department Palace Road, Bangalore-560 001 4. Central Bureau of Investigation Union of India New Delhi-110 003. ... Respondents (By Sri. P.B.Achappa, AGA. For R1 to R3) This writ appeal is filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, praying to set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated: 27.02.2019 in WP.No.51256/2017 and etc.
This appeal, coming on for orders, this day, Chief Justice delivered the following:
JUDGMENT None appears for the appellant. Even in the morning also, none appeared for the appellant.
2. By the impugned order dated 27th February 2019, writ petition filed by the appellant has been rejected by the learned Single Judge. The second respondent, after carrying out investigation on the basis of the first information report, filed a charge-sheet in the Criminal Court.
3. The prayer in the writ petition filed by the appellant was for directing the State Government to withdraw the charge-sheet and direct transfer of investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The second prayer is a consequential prayer, directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to carry out the investigation without being influenced by the investigation carried out by the second respondent.
4. Firstly, the prayer for directing the State Government to withdraw the charge-sheet can never be granted in law. Secondly, as noted by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order, in fact, the trial has also commenced and summons to witnesses have been issued by the Sessions Court for their appearance on 8th March 2019.
5. Therefore, we do not find any error in the view taken by the learned Single Judge in rejecting the petition. However, rejection will not affect the merits of the pendency of criminal case. There is no reason to entertain the appeal. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
Pending interlocutory application for delay is also dismissed.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-