IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4417 OF 2016 BETWEEN:
1. SRIKALA W/O SANJAY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 2. SANJAY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O C.P PRABHAKAR NAIR BOTH R/AT DOOR NO. 133, BLOCK NO. 27, POLICE LANE, PANDESHWARA, MANGALORE - 575 001.
... PETITIONERS (BY SRI: KARUNAKAR P, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BARKE POLICE STATION REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SMT. VASANTHI K W/O GOPAL AGED 45 YEARS, R/AT 18-7/269/304, POLICE LANE, 46 CONTONMENTS, MANGALORE - 575 001.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; R2-SERVED -UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR. NO.116/2013 BEFORE THE BARKE POLICE, MANGALORE PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. SR. C.J. AND C.J.M., MANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 406, 415, 417, 420, 506, 120-B R/W 34 OF IPC.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 26.07.2013 passed by the Prl. Sr. CJ & CJM, Mangalore and the consequent registration of FIR in Crime No.116/2013 under sections 406, 415, 417, 420, 506, 120-B read with 34 of IPC.
2. Respondent No.2 herein filed a private complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C., seeking action against petitioners for the above offences. The complaint was filed on 26.07.2013 and the same was put up for orders and learned Magistrate passed the following order:-
“On 26.07.2013 at 11 A.M., Sri K.K.K., Advocate presented the complaint. Register the complaint as PCR. Complaint is referred to P.I. Urva P.S. for investigation and report u/Sec.156(3) of CrPC. Call 2-9-2013 for report.”
This order, on the face of it, indicates that learned Magistrate has failed to apply his mind to the facts of the case and has mechanically passed the order, referring the complaint for investigation and report under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.
3. Law is now well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in MAKSUD SAIYED vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS, (2008) 5 SCC 668, wherein it is held that the requirement of application of mind by the Magistrate before exercising jurisdiction under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is of paramount importance. The learned Magistrate having failed to apply his mind to the facts of the case, in my view, the impugned order directing investigation by the Urva police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the consequent registration of the FIR is liable to be set-aside.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned direction referring the complaint for investigation by the Urva Police under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and consequent registration of the FIR in Cr.No.116/2013 is hereby set-aside. The matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate to pass appropriate orders on the complaint filed by the second respondent in accordance with law.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss