IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.22671 OF 2019 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
RASHMI S. SHAVANTI W/O VIKRAM B. PATIL AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT NO.135, 1ST FLOOR, ITI LAYOUT VINAYAKA LAYOUT MAIN ROAD NAYANDAHALLI, BENGALURU … PETITIONER (BY SHRI. B.N.PRITHVI RAJ, ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANDRA LAYOUT POLICE STATION BENGALURU-560 039 REP. BY POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR ... RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD:11.04.2019 PASSED BY THE VIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU IN CRIME NO.63/2019 [VIDE ANNEXURE-A] THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioner registered FIR No.63/2019 in Chandra Layout Police Station against her husband and father-in-law alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 498A, 354 and 34 of IPC. Investigating Officer namely, the Sub-Inspector of Chandra Layout Police Station filed a memorandum before the VIII ACMM, Bengaluru, seeking transfer of FIR from Bengaluru to Hubli.
2. Shri B.N.Prithvi Raj, learned advocate for petitioner submits that petitioner’s husband (accused No.1) works as a Police Constable in Navanagar, Hubli. Investigating Officer has sought transfer of the FIR to the very same Police Station. He further submits that learned Magistrate has not applied his mind and has signed mechanically beneath a seal affixed on the requisition which reads as “permitted”.
3. Learned advocate for petitioner further submits that petitioner was driven out of the matrimonial home at Hubli.
4. Perusal of the FIR shows that accused No.1-Vikram B.Patil works as Police Constable in Navanagar, Hubli. A perusal of the said requisition shows that the learned Magistrate has endorsed as ‘permitted’. No reasons are recorded for granting permission.
5. This Court has taken a consistent view that a mere endorsement made by the learned Magistrate as ‘permitted’ without recording reasons is not permissible in law. [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)].
6. Keeping in view, the fact that the petitioner’s husband is a Police Constable working in Navanagar Police station, Hubli, the impugned order permitting transfer of the criminal case to the very same police station defeats logic. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and it is accordingly allowed. Hence, the following;
ORDER (i) Order dated 11.04.2019 passed by learned VIII ACMM, Bengaluru, permitting transfer of FIR No.63/2019 from Bengaluru to Hubli is set-aside; and (ii) Police shall continue the investigation in Chandra Layout Police Station, Bengaluru.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV