IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2427/2018 BETWEEN:
SRI S PUTTAIAH S/O SRI SIDDABASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O DALAVAYI KODIHALLI, HALAGUR HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 401.
(BY SRI K ABHINAV ANAND, ADVOCATE) AND:
... PETITIONER 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY S H O OF HALAGUR P.S., REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560001.
2. SRI K LINGAIAH S/O SRI SOMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,. # 1417, 1ST BLOCK, SIR M VISHVESHWARAYYA LAYOUT, KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN, BENGALURU-560060 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S. RACHAIAH, HCGP. FOR R1 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O. DATED 11.03.2019) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE CORUT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1248/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MALAVALLI, MANDYA DIST. ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Though matter is listed for admission, by consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal, by dispensing notice to de-facto complainant.
2. Marriage between petitioner and Smt.S.L.Vijayashree, came to be solemnized on 26.04.2012. On account of certain disputes having arisen, her father – respondent No.2 herein is stated to have lodged a complaint before the jurisdictional police on 07.06.2013, which resulted in registration of FIR in Crime No.118/2013 and on completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed in C.C.No.1248/2013 for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 504, 506 r/w. 149 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of D.P.Act. For quashing of said proceedings, petitioner is before this Court.
3. It is the contention of Sri K. Abhinav Anand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that learned Magistrate has not taken cognizance of the offences alleged and order sheet of trial Court also does not disclose order having been passed by Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence and as such, proceedings continued against petitioner is liable to be quashed.
4. Learned Government Pleader is unable to demonstrate before this Court any order having been passed by Magistrate taking cognizance of the alleged offence.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the order sheet of the trial Court which is at Annexure ‘A’, it would disclose that on charge sheet being filed, matter has been put up before the learned jurisdictional Magistrate upon which summons has been issued to the accused persons including the petitioner. However, for reasons best known learned Magistrate, has not taken cognizance of the offences as alleged against the petitioner. On this ground alone, proceedings cannot be allowed to be continued and as such petitioner would be entitled for the relief partially. Accordingly, following order is passed:
ORDER i) Criminal petition is allowed in part.
ii) Matter is remanded back to the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC at Malavalli, Mandya district, to proceed from the stage of taking cognizance after having examined the charge sheet material produced by the jurisdictional Investigating Officer.
It is made clear that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the case. I.A.No.1/2019 for stay does not survive for consideration since petition has been allowed in part.
SD/- JUDGE nvj