IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR CRL.P. NO.9758/2017 BETWEEN:
1. MR. RAJESH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O LATE DAMODAR SAPALYA, BRANCH MANAGER, D.K & UDUPI FISH CO-OPERATIVE FEDERATION LTD.
R/A D.NO.10/1(1) NEAR CELIYA BRIDGE, MANGALURU, D.K.-574001.
2. SURESH KUMAR AGED 61 YEARS, S/O GOVERDHANA R. KOTIAN, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR FISH MARKETTING CORPORATION D.K & UDUPI #302, A JULIE BAGH APARTMENTS, PANDESHWAR, MANGALURU-574001.
3. PARSHWANATH.P AGED 56 YEARS, THE MANAGING DIRECTOR D.K & UDUPI FISH MARKETTING R/AT 108/5, VAJRA, NEAR GOPALAKRISHNA TEMPLE CLASSIQUE VILLAGE LAUOUT, SAKTHINAGAR, MANGALURU-574001 ….PETITIONERS (SRI H.MALATESH, ADV.) AND:
1. ANJANADEVI.T ASST. DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES GRADE-01, GANGOLLI FISHING HARBOUR, UDUPI DISTRICT-575201 2. THE STATE-THROUGH THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALURU SOUTH POLICE STATION, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT- REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU-560001.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: MAHESH SHETTY, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.117/2017 OF MANGALURU SOUTH POLICE STATION, MANGALURU TALUK, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 2ND ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND C.J.M. COURT, MANGALURU CITY, MANGALURU AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN THE SAID CASE.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned High Court Govt. Pleader.
2. Petitioner No.1 is the Manager of the diesel bunk, Mangaluru Harbor. Petitioner No.2 is the Deputy Director, Fisheries and Petitioner No.3 was working as Senior Assistant Director of Fisheries.
3. That the first respondent took charge as the Assistant Director Grade-1 at Gangolli Fishing Fort, Udupi District and on perusing the records, it is alleged that certain discrepancies were noticed leading to the belief that there has been misappropriation on account of certain foul play by the accused. It is alleged that the accused have inflated the figures regarding quantum of diesel dispensed to the fishing boats, resulting in loss to the exchequer and hence the complaint dated 07.07.2017 came to be lodged with the second respondent. The complainant has narrated certain instances which prima-facie in the opinion of the complainant demonstrates the commission of offence and prayed for initiating action against the persons who were guilty of committing the offence. Pursuant to the same, a case came to be registered as Crime No.0177/2017 for the offences punishable under Section 403, 409, 420 and 468 of IPC and the police have taken up for investigation.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations have been leveled against the accused in respect of a period during which they were not deployed in the respective places. Per contra the learned High Court Govt. Pleader would submit that the respondent police have already finalized the charge sheet and the same is awaiting legal opinion.
5. Be that as it may, the perusal of the complaint prima- facie discloses the commission of certain offences which are punishable under law. The fact as to whether the petitioners were in charge or otherwise is a matter for investigation and as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the relief under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. cannot be granted by adverting to the merits and demerits of the defense adopted by the persons arrayed as accused. It is contended by the petitioners that the bills have been subjected to audit and the auditor has not found any infirmities and the auditor has certified the same.
6. No ground is made out warranting further consideration of the petition. Hence, petition is dismissed without being admitted.
The observations made herein above are for the purpose of disposal of the petition.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs*