IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8128 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
K.N. Nagegowda, S/o. late Nanjegowda, Aged about 48 years, R/at Manya Garden, Periyadka, Uppinangady, Putturu Taluk, D.K. District – 574 210. …Petitioner (By Sri. Lethif B., Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, By Handanakere Police Station, Tumkur District, Represented by SPP, High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Chandrakala, W/o. Nagaraju, Major, R/at Kengalapurapalya, Handanakere Hobli, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District – 561 256. ...Respondents (By Sri. I.S. Pramod Chandra, SPP-II for R1; R2 – Served – unrepresented.) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the FIR in Crime No.40/2016 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Chikkanayakanahalli.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned SPP-II for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented.
2. Petitioner has sought to quash the FIR in Crime No.40/2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 306 r/w 34 of IPC. He contends that his name is shown in the FIR merely on the basis of a chit found in the shirt of the deceased, who committed suicide by hanging. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the said chit it is mentioned that the teachers by name Mudlappa, Kodandarama, H.M. Manjunatha and Nagegowda were responsible for the death of the deceased. The petitioner herein is not a teacher by profession and therefore, on the face of it, implication of the petitioner in the alleged offences is untenable. Even the statements given by the witnesses indicate that the petitioner is not a teacher by profession and therefore, there is no nexus between the petitioner and the alleged perpetrator of the crime. Hence, prosecution of the petitioner for the alleged offences is wholly illegal and an abuse of process of Court.
3. Though there is sufficient material to show that the deceased himself has alleged that the persons named in the chit are responsible for his death, yet, whether the petitioner herein answers the said description is a matter to be determined by the Investigating Officer while forming an opinion after completing investigation. It is true that the witnesses have stated that the petitioner herein was not a teacher by profession, but the said aspect has to be determined by the Investigating Officer by considering all the materials collected by him in the course of investigation. Since, the matter itself is under investigation and final opinion is not yet formed by the Investigating Officer, it is premature to accept the contentions urged by the petitioner.
Hence, keeping open the above contention for consideration of the Investigating Officer, petition is dismissed. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to challenge the final report, if any, submitted by the Investigating Officer.
Sd/- JUDGE SV