IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.16582 OF 2017 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
SRI.B.M.NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA @ MUNISWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS RESIDING AT BELTHUR VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI KADUGODI POST BANGALORE EAST TALUK BANGALORE – 560 067.
(By Mr.DEVARAJ N., ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY KADUGODI POLICE STATION KADUGODI BANGALORE – 560 067.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BEHIND IPTL, NEAR VYDEHI HOSPITAL BANGALORE – 560 066.
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KADUGODI POLICE STATION KADUGODI BANGALORE – 560 067.
… PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS (By Mr.VIJAY KUMAR A PATIL AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS, PERTIANING TO THE CASE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Devaraj N., learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.Vijay Kumar A.Patil, learned Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to entrust the investigation in Crime No.13/2017 registered in Kadugodi Police Station to a specialized Investigating Agency viz., Central Bureau of Investigation or Central Investigation Department or City Crime Branch.
4. Facts giving rise to the filing of the petition briefly stated are that the petitioner’s sister Smt.Krishanamma filed a suit viz., O.S.No.535/2011 before Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bengaluru. The suit was compromised between the parties by out of court settlement. The sister of the petitioner executed a release deed in respect of certain properties on 11.11.2014 and on the same day, the petitioner executed a gift deed in favour of her sister in respect of certain properties. The petitioner’s niece viz., Smt.Gayathri i.e., the daughter of sister of the petitioner, Smt.Krishnamma abducted the petitioner and got executed a gift deed in respect of certain properties on 29.01.2015. The petitioner on 06.06.2015, filed a suit for declaration of title and cancellation of General Power of Attorney as well as sale deeds dated 11.09.2015 and 30.09.2015 and for perpetual injunction in the suit viz., O.S.No.884/2016. On 28.08.2016, the sister of the petitioner and others have threatened the petitioner with dire consequences. Thereafter, the petitioner lodged a complaint on 29.08.2016, which was not registered. The petitioner thereafter filed a complaint under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, and 506 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 before 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bangalore Rural at Bangalore. Thereupon, FIR was registered as Crime No.14/2017. However, no steps were taken by the respondent. Thereupon, this petition has been filed seeking the reliefs supra.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Admittedly during the pendency of the petition, the police authorities have completed the investigation and have filed ‘B’ report before the Magistrate concerned. Admittedly, the petitioner being aggrieved has filed an objection to the report. Therefore, the relief sought for by the petitioner in this petition has been rendered infructuous by efflux of time. Therefore, at this point of time no interference is called for in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which otherwise is discretionary in nature. Needless to state, that the Magistrate shall deal with the objections filed by the petitioner to the report and shall take appropriate action in accordance with law in the light of decision of the Supreme Court in the case of ‘SAKIRI VASU VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS’, (2008) 2 SCC 409.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS