IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRL.P. NO. 4037/2017 BETWEEN:
1. MR.SIRIMANE NAGARAJ, S/O LATE SIRIMANE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.28/102, 1ST FLOOR, VALAGERAHALLI MAIN ROAD, KENGERI UPANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 060 2. MR. NOOR SRIDHAR @ NOOR ZUFIKAR, S/O LATE ABDUL MUNNASHAB, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT NO.28/102, 1ST FLOOR, VALAGERAHALLI MAIN ROAD, KENGERI UPANAGARA, BENGALURU – 560 060 3. MR. MANASAIAH, S/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.12-10-85/1 DUDIME DANAMMA NILAYA, NEAR GOVT SCHOOL, SIYATALAB, RAICHUR TALUK, RAICHUR – 584 101 4. DR. VASU H. V.
S/O LATE VENKATASUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.13, 6TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN, P AND T COLONY, SANJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 094 5. MR. ASHOK K.L., S/O K.S. LAKSHMANAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT BAIRAVA KRUPA, GANAPATHY BADAVANE, 1ST CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 301 6. MR. NARASIMHAMURTHY, S/O LATE MANNARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.1642, 5TH MAIN ROAD, KENGERI UPANAGARA, BENGALURU – 560 060 7. MR. RAVI KRISHNA REDDY, S/O LATE KRISHNA REDDY V., AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.222, B4, THUNGABADRA BLOCK, NATIONAL GAMES VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 047 5. MR. VEERASANGAIAH, S/O LATE J.M. SHIVAMURTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT PINJARA HEGADALU ANCHE, AGARI, BOMMANAHALLI TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT, BALLARI - 583 212.
... PETITIONERS (BY SMT.LEELA P. DEVADIGA, ADV. FOR SRI. A. K. SUBBAIAH, ADV.) AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY UPPARA PETE POLICE STATION, REP BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI.SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SPP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.205/2016 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO INCLUDING THE CHARGE SHEET BEARING NO.4860/2016 OF UPPARPETE P.S., PENDING ON THE FILE OF IX ADDL.C.M.M., NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/Ss. 341, 143, 149 OF IPC.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION ALONG WITH IA NO.1/2017 THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard Smt. Leela P. Devadiga, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri. A.K. Subbaiah, for petitioner and Sri. Sandesh J. Chouta, learned Additional S.P.P. appearing for Respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. Petitioners who have been arraigned as Accused Nos.1 to 7 & 9 in C.C. No.4860/2017 registered by Uppara Pete Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 143, 149 & 188 of IPC, are seeking for quashing of said proceedings.
3. Petitioners herein, under the banner of ‘The Land and Shelterless People’s Committee of Karnataka’ had organized a rally on 20.08.2016 to spear head the movement espousing the cause of landless and shelterless people in the State of Karnataka on the occasion of Centenary Celebration of late Sri. Devaraj Urs, Former Chief Minister of Karnataka, demanding thereunder that all landless people should be granted 5 acres of land and siteless people should be granted house sites. Several sister organizations is also said to have joined hands with petitioners in espousing such cause. Prior to conducting said rally and protest march, permission was sought for from the jurisdictional police by 1st petitioner and accordingly permission was granted subject to the conditions specified thereunder vide Annexure-E. On obtaining such permission, petitioners have conducted procession on the date of event.
4. According to petitioners, they had adhered to the conditions specified in the order (Annexure-E) sanctioned by the statutory authorities and the procession had proceeded in a disciplined manner, which culminated in a meeting at Freedom Park. It is also contended that, said procession was conducted in a disciplined manner without violation of any of the conditions of the permission (Annexure-E) so as to attract Section-103 of the Karnataka Police Act and yet a complaint came to be registered in Crime No.205/2016 against petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 143, 149, 188 of IPC and after investigation, charge sheet came to be filed for the said offences without there being any offence, muchless the one alleged by prosecution.
5. Smt. Leela P. Devadiga, learned counsel appearing for petitioners would contend that, none of the conditions stipulated in the permission granted under Annexure-E had been violated by the petitioners and it is specifically contended that violation of 6th condition for grant of approval would attract Section 103 of the Karnataka Police Act. However, it is not the case of the prosecution that, petitioners had violated all the conditions under which they have been permitted to carry-out the procession. The present allegation made in the complaint as well as in the charge sheet material is based on a fabricated theory of the prosecution. Hence, she prays for quashing of the proceedings.
6. Per contra, Sri. Sandesh J. Chouta, the learned Additional S.P.P., appearing for the Respondent-State would support initiation of prosecution against petitioners and contends that, conditions imposed by the authorities clearly disclosed that, procession ought to have been proceeded only on the left side of the road without causing obstruction or hindrance to flow of traffic and said condition had not been followed by petitioners and as such, there is no illegality committed by respondent in registration of FIR against petitioners as well as filing of charge sheet, on completion of investigation.
7. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties and on perusal of the charge sheet material it would emerge therefrom that, on 20.08.2016 petitioners had taken out a procession to highlight the problems of landless and siteless persons in the State of Karnataka and to espouse their cause. It is also not in dispute that for taking out such a procession, petitioners had sought for permission from police authorities and it came to be accorded as per Annexure-E and one of the conditions which came to be imposed apart from five conditions indicated on the over-leaf of Annexure-E is that, petitioners or persons taking out such procession should not block the road and vehicular movement should not be obstructed.
8. A reading of the complaint at Annexure-A would disclose that, while such procession was being taken out, petitioners are said to have not only shouted slogans but had also squatted on the road causing obstruction to the traffic/vehicle movement. Even if the contention of the prosecution is accepted, the conditions stipulated for according permission for carrying-out procession under Annexure-E would disclose that, violation of said condition would attract Section 103 of Karnataka Police Act, 1963. However, proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners under Sections 341, 13, 149 and 188 of IPC, and not under Section 103 of Karnataka Police Act. Hence, present proceedings initiated against petitioners cannot be sustained.
Hence, the following order:
ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Proceedings initiated against petitioners pending in C.C. No.4860/2017 (Crime No.205/2016) on the file of 9th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.
(iii) However, quashing of said proceedings would not come in the way of Respondent- State initiating action under Section 103 of Karnataka Police Act against petitioners.
In view of disposal of this petition, application-IA No.1/2017 filed for stay, does not survive for consideration. Accordingly, IA No.1/2017 stands dismissed.
SD/- JUDGE KGR*