Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Smt T Rathnamma vs State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|11 December, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA Crl.P. No.1911 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
Smt.T.Rathnamma, W/o Gopalaiah, Aged about 35 years, R/at Niluvagilu Village, H.D.Kote Taluk, Mysuru District-571121.
(By Sri. Srinivasa D.C. Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka, By Saraguru Poilce, Represented by The State Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Bengaluru-560001.
2. The Executive Officer, Taluk Panchayath, H.D.Kote Taluk, Mysuru District-571114.
…..Petitioner ...Respondents (By Sri.Sandesh J Chouta-SPP II) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to quash the charge sheet and proceedings registered by the respondent No.1 Saraguru Police against the Petitioner (Accused No.2) in C.C.NO.12/2016 U/s 408, 409, 467, 420, 471 R/w Sec.34 of IPC pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C.,H.D.Kote.
This petition coming on for ‘Admission’ this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned SPP. Learned SPP takes notice for respondents. Perused the records.
2. It is alleged in the charge sheet papers that the petitioner is the President of Tumbasoge Village Panchayath and it is alleged that accused No.1- Secretary and this petitioner have jointly committed the offences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 467, 420, 471 by issuing job cards in favour of the persons who are not in existence and also created certain job cards and drawn money under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme.
3. When there is allegation in the charge sheet and in support of the case, Investigation Officer has examined number of witnesses, at this stage, it is not a fit case to quash the entire proceedings. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to approach the trial Court with necessary application for discharge, if advised. In that eventuality, trial Court has to provide an opportunity to both the parties and dispose of the said application, in accordance with Law.
Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE JS
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt T Rathnamma vs State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
11 December, 2017
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra