IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5th DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K.N.PHANEENDRA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6680 of 2017 BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Nirmalamma W/o Lakshminarasimhappa Aged about 40 years Residing at KHB Colony, 1st Ward, DVG Road, Bagepallli, Bagepalli Taluk, Chikkaballapura District 561 201 2. Sri V.W Lakshminarasimhappa S/o V.N. Narasimhaiah Aged about 45 years Residing at KHB Colony 1st Ward, DVG Road, Bagepalli,Bagepalli Taluk Chikkaballapura District 561 207 (By Sri. Naveen T.N. Advocate) AND 1. The State of Karnataka Represented by Bagepalli Police Station, Chikkaballapura District 560 120 By SPP Office of SPP, High Court of Karnataka Bangalore 560 001 …PETITIONERS 2. Sri Shivashankarappa Aged about 45 years S/o Police Channarayappa, Residing at 17th Ward, Bagepalli Town Bagepalli Taluk Chikkaballapura District-561 207 (By Sri. Sandesh T Chouta, SPP-II for R1) ) …RESPONDENTS This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.PC, praying to quash criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners in Spl.C.C.No.1/2016 before the Prl. District & Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur filed by the respondents against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 504,506 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
This Criminal Petition coming on for admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the records.
2. The police have charge-sheeted the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)((x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and also under Sections 341,504,323,355,506 r/w Section 34 of IPC, making allegations that on 23.6.2015 the accused persons have committed the said offences by going near the shop of the complainant and abused him referring to his caste and threatened him with dire consequences of killing him etc. As could be seen from the charge-sheet papers, there are as many as six witnesses apart from the complainant. The police have thoroughly investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the decision of this court in Crl.P.No.8627/2016, wherein this Court has altogether quashed the entire proceedings only on the ground that the police have wrongly mentioned the provisions under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC & ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, though the same has been substituted by corresponding provision in the amended Act. Merely because a wrong provision is quoted by the police, in my opinion, it will not take away the entire allegations made in the charge sheet papers. Therefore, the said decision, in my opinion is not applicable to the present facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, I am of the opinion the trial court has to look into the provision of law at the time of framing of charge after referring the allegations made in the charge-sheet to find out which of the penal provisions are attracted. Under the above said circumstances, I do not find any strong reason to quash the entire charge sheet on that ground. Hence the petition deserves to be dismissed, accordingly dismissed.
In view of the disposal of the main petition, IA No.1/17 does not survive for consideration.
` Sd/- JUDGE PSG