IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8535 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
1. MS. SUHANI SURYA MOHAN D/O MR. SURYA MOHAN AND DR. SADHANA MOHAN, HOD, BARC, GOVT OF INDIA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT 36, SHANTINIKETAN, BARC COLONY, ANUSHAKTINAGAR, MUMBAI 400094 2. MR. KARTIK MEHTA S/O MR. DILIP MEHTA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/AT 1C-43, KALPATARU AURA, OPP: RCITY MALL, GHATKOPAR WEST, MUMBAI 400086 (BY SRI: AJAY RAO, ADVOCATE) ... PETITIONERS AND 1. THE CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION CID ANNEXE BUILDING, CARLTON HOUSE, #1, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE 560001 2. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION, CID ANNEXE BUILDING, CARLTON HOUSE, #1, PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE 560001 3. MR. PRANSHU SUGARA S/O MR. K.S SUGARA, NO. 8-C, "KALPATARU"
BLOCK NO. 7, 14TH -C-CROSS, 1ST -B-MAIN, IAS COLONY, SECTOR-6, HSR LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560102 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP FOR R1 & R2 MS. MANASI SHARMA, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THE CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED BY THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS IN I A.C.M.M., BANGALORE IN CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION IN CR.NO.3/2015 AT ANNEXURE-A, RESTRAIN THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS FROM PROCEEDING WITH ANY INVESTIGATION INTO THE SAID FIR.
THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioners have sought to quash the FIR registered against them in Crime No.3/2015 registered by the Cyber Crime Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under sections 406, 465, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code and sections 66(A) and 66(C) of Information Technology Act, 2008.
2. The only contention urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the limits of the Cyber Crime Police Station, Bengaluru and hence, assumption of jurisdiction by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 – Police to investigate into the alleged offences is illegal and violative of provisions of the Code.
3. Learned counsel for the third respondent disputes the submission and submits that the offence alleged against the petitioners has wide ramification and since the said offence relate to cyber crime, unless the matter is investigated by the Police, it is premature to contend that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 – Police have no jurisdiction to investigate into the offence.
4. Notwithstanding the contention urged by the rival parties, since the matter is under investigation, in view of section 154 of Cr.P.C., the police investigating the matter if arrive at a conclusion that the offence is not committed within their jurisdictional limits, they are duty-bound to transfer the investigation to the competent Police Station for investigation. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 –Police shall follow the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in LALITHA KUMARI vs. GOVERNMENT OF U.P. reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1 and shall proceed in the matter accordingly.
With this observation, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE Bss