IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.15647 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
Sri P. Shivaprasad, S/o late Thipparaju, Aged about 45 years, Commissioner, City Municipal Council, Chickmagalur – 577 101. … Petitioner (By Ms. Pavithra N., Advocate For Sri. Nagarajappa A., Advocate) AND:
1. The State of Karnataka, Represented by ACB Police, Chickmagalur, Chickmagalur District, Office of State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru – 560 001.
2. Sri. Kodandarama Setty, S/o late Ganga Setty, Aged about 59 years, Residing at 7th Cross, Vijayapura, Chickmagalur – 577 101, Chickmagalur District. … Respondents (By Sri. Jagadeesha B.N., Special PP for R1) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the FIR against the petitioner in crime No.6/2016 pending before the Prl. District and Sessions Judge at Chickmagalur For the offences P/U/Ss 7, 13(1)(b) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of corruption Act 1988 at Annexure – C and etc., This Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Ms. Pavitra N., learned counsel for Sri. Nagarajappa A., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri. Jagadeesha B.N., learned Special Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of both the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’ for short), the petitioner inter alia seeks quashment of the proceeding initiated against him under Sections 7, 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in Crime No.6/2016 pending before the Principal District and Sessions Judge at Chickmagalur.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that during the pendency of this petition, trial Court by an order dated 26.03.2019, has adjourned the matter to 08.05.2019 for framing of charge or plea and the learned counsel for the petitioner has given consent in this regard before the trial Court.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for respondent No.1 has produced the copy of the order dated 26.03.2019 for perusal of this Court, which is taken on record.
5. In view of the fact that the petitioner/accused has given consent to frame the charges as is evident from the order dated 26.03.2018, no case for interference in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code is made out. However, needless to state that in case charges are framed against the petitioner, he shall be at liberty to take recourse to such remedy as may be available to him under law.
6. With the aforesaid liberty, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Mds/-