IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7498 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
Sri. K. Keshavaraja, S/o. Sri. K.K. Sharma, Aged about 58 years, Working as Election Tahasildar, BBMP, R/at 255, 4th A-Main, Jnanabharati, 3rd Block, R.V.College Post, Bengaluru – 560 059. …Petitioner (By Sri. Ambrish B.N., Advocate for Sri. Santosh S. Nagarale, Advocate) AND:
State, By Thirthahalli Police Station, Shivamogga District, Represented by S.P.P., High Court Building, Bengaluru – 560 001. ...Respondent (By Sri. I.S. Pramod Chandra, SPP-II) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the Order passed on Application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure dated 11.09.2015 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Thirthahalli, in C.C.No.335/2013.
This Criminal petition coming on for Admission, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Petitioner was a Tahasildar working in Thirthahalli Taluk. The allegations against the petitioner is during discharge of his official duty, he failed to deposit a sum of Rs.3,000/- collected by him by way of penalty, into the Treasury and mis-appropriated the same for his personal use.
2. Petitioner has sought to quash the impugned proceedings on the ground that the allegations made against the petitioner prima-facie indicate that the alleged offences have been committed while discharging the official duty and therefore, prosecution of the petitioner without prior sanction as required under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. has vitiated the entire proceedings registered against the petitioner.
3. The contention is disputed by the learned SPP-II contending that the offences alleged against the petitioner is not protected under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. as the accusations made against the petitioner relates to mis-appropriation of the public funds. The said act cannot be said to have been performed by the petitioner in discharging of his official duties. In the case of N.K.GANGULY vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, NEW DELHI, the Hon’ble Supreme Court applied the principle to the facts of the case and has held that since allegations made against the appellant in the final report pointed out that the alleged offences were committed by them in discharge of their official duty, therefore, it was essential to obtain previous sanction. But, in the instant case, the act committed by the petitioner is not in discharge of his official duty.
Therefore, in my view, sanction for the prosecution of the petitioner is not necessary. Hence, I do not find merit in the petition. Consequently, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE SV