Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri K Jayanna vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|10 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA BETWEEN:
SRI K.JAYANNA CRL.P.NO.7491/2013 S/O KOTRABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 9TH MAIN, 9TH CROSS, MCCA BLOCK, DAVANAGERE-577 502 (BY SRI.S.P.KULKARNI, ADV.,) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPTD. BY ITS AZAD NAGAR POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE NOW REPRESENTED BY STATE P.P.
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE TAHSILDAR DAVANAGERE TALUK DAVANAGERE-577 502 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.
(BY SRI.I.S.PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP-II) …PETITIONER ... RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1860/12 ON THE FILE OF THE II JMFC, DAVANAGERE, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned SPP-II for the respondents.
2. This petition requires to be allowed on the short question of apparent error detected in the order of taking cognizance of the offence by the learned Magistrate.
3. A perusal of the order dated 20.07.2012 indicates that the learned Magistrate has not applied his mind to the facts of the case. The provisions of the Sections are filled up in a pre-typed order. Such a course is held to be violative of the requirements of Section 190 of the Cr.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of his contention has relied on the following decisions:
(i) Smt. Patchiammal –vs- K.C.Sriramalu (2009) 2 KLJ 451 (ii) M/s.Vijaya Bank –vs- State by Labour Enforcement Officer (ILR 2000 KAR 4773) (iii) Mallikarjuna –vs- State of Karnataka (2017 (5) KCCR 667).
5. Following the above decisions, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The order of cognizance dated 20.07.2012 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to consider the matter afresh and proceed in accordance with law.
All the contentions urged by the petitioner in this petition are kept open.
Sd/- JUDGE TL
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri K Jayanna vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
10 January, 2019
Judges
  • John Michael Cunha