Judgment:
- 1 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE7H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13215 OF2023BETWEEN:
1. SRI. KRISHNAPPA M.T, S/O SRI. THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT65YEARS, R/AT MUTHSNDRA VILLAGE, TURUVEKERE TOWN, TURUVEKERE TALUK AND SARASWATHIPURA, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 227.
2. SRI. SWAMY, S/O KEMPEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT45YEARS, R/AT TURUVEKERE TOWN, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMKURU DSITRICT - 572 227. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. NANDINI B, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. BHARGAV G, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TURUVEKERE POLICE, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.-. 2 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 2. SRI. VISHWANATH, S/O SHIVAKUMARASWAMY, AGED ABOUT48YEARS, TURUVEKERE TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT, EDAGI HALLI VILLAGE - 572 227. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; R2 - SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED1710.2020 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., TURUVEKERE IN C.C.NO.372/2020 (ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.181/2020 OF TURUVEKERE POLICE) TAKING COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S504R/W34OF IPC, NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF XLII ADDL.C.M.M. (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF CASES AGAINST SITTING AS WELL AS FORMER MPs/MLAs, TRIABLE BY MAGISTRATE IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA) BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.30808/2021. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDER
S, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.372/2020 arising out of crime - 3 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 No.181/2020 for offences punishable under Sections 34 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for short).
2. Heard learned counsel Smt. Nandini B., for learned counsel, Sri. Bhargav G., appearing for the petitioner and learned Additional SPP, Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, appearing for respondent No.1.
3. Respondent No.2 though served, remains unrepresented throughout the proceedings and even today.
4. The second respondent is the complainant and claims to be the president of a political party. After the elections, it is the allegation of the complainant that the petitioners on loosing their elections seek to undermine the dignity of the party by derogatory statements or intimidating the complainant. Since the offence was only for intimidation, as obtaining under Section 504 of the IPC, the police on receipt of the complaint render a non cognizable report and place the complaint before the learned Magistrate for obtaining permission to register a crime on a non cognizable offence - 504 read with 34 of the IPC. The learned Magistrate permits registration of a crime. It is then, the crime in crime - 4 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 No.181/2020 comes to be registered. The police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet in C.C.No.372/2020 for the afore-quoted offences. The concerned Court takes cognizance of the offence and registers C.C.No.372/2020 for offence punishable under Sections 504 and 34 of the IPC and issue summons to the petitioners. The issuance of summons is what has driven the petitioners to this Court in the subject petition.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners taking this Court through the order granting permission to register a crime would submit that it would cut at the root of the matter, as it bears no application of mind, as is necessary in law. The learned counsel would submit, everything in the aftermath of the registration of a crime would be a nullity on account of the effect at the foundation.
6. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, would submit that how the order of learned Magistrate does bear application of mind permitting the registration of the crime. He would take this Court through the order to defend the action and submit that the police have filed - 5 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 the charge sheet and it is for the petitioners to come out clean in a full bloom trial.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material available on record.
8. The afore-narrated facts are a matter of record. The registration of the crime is triggered by presentation of the complaint by the second respondent. Therefore, it becomes necessary to notice the complaint. The complaint dated 24.08.2020 reads as follows:
"ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:9)ೕ(cid:10)ೕ(cid:11) ಸ(cid:13)ಇ(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)ೆಕ(cid:19)(cid:20)ರವ(cid:22)(cid:23)ೆ. ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)ಕು ಘಟಕದ ಾರ!ೕಯ ಜನ(cid:24)ಾ ¥Á%&ಯ ಅದ()(cid:8)ಾದ *ೆ+.ಎ(cid:11).-ಶ/0ಾ1 2(cid:15) 3ವಕು4ಾರ5ಾ/6 ಆದ 0ಾನು ಬ(cid:8)ೆದು(cid:7)ೊಡು!:ರುವ ;gÁåದು. 5ಾ/6, ಏ0ೆಂದ(cid:8)ೆ 0ಾನು ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)ಕು ಘಟಕದ ಾರ!ೕಯ ಜನ(cid:24)ಾ (cid:17)ಾ%&ಯ ಆದ()(cid:8)ಾ> (cid:7)ೆಲಸ 4ಾಡು!:?.ೆ@ೕ0ೆ. ತುರು(cid:4)ೇಕ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)Aನ(cid:10)(cid:28) ಾರ!ೕಯ ಜನ(cid:24)ಾ (cid:17)ಾ%&ಯ Bಾಸಕ(cid:8)ಾದ ಮ5ಾಲ, ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾDರವರು ಚು0ಾFತ ಪH!IJKಾ> (cid:7)ೆಲಸ 4ಾಡು(cid:24)ಾ: ಜನ;Hಯ(cid:8)ಾ>ರು(cid:24)ಾ:(cid:8)ೆ. ಕLೆದ ¨Á(cid:1)(cid:2)య ಚು0ಾವMೆಯ(cid:10)(cid:28) 3Hೕ ಎಂ.%.ಕೃಷPಪQನವರು ಪ(cid:8)ಾಭವ(cid:23)ೊಂSರು(cid:24)ಾ:(cid:8)ೆ. (cid:8)ಾಜAೕಯ ?.ೆ/ೕಷTಂದ ಮತು: ಚು0ಾವMೆಯ(cid:10)(cid:28) 5ೋ!ರುವ (cid:7)ಾರಣ, Bಾಸಕ(cid:8)ಾದ ಮ5ಾಲ ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾDರವರ ಜನ;Hಯ(cid:24)ೆಯನುV (cid:24)ಾಳXಾರ?.ೆ, *ೊYೆ(cid:19)AZ[Iಂದ ಮತು: ಮ5ಾಲ ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾD ರವ(cid:22)(cid:23)ೆ 5ಾವ&ಜIಕರ(cid:10)(cid:28) (cid:7)ೆಟ(cid:19) *ೆಸರು ಬರ(cid:10) ఎంబ ಉ?.ೆ@ೕಶTಂದ ಮತು:
5. ವ&ಜIಕ ಮುಂ?.ೆ Bಾಸಕ(cid:8)ಾದ ಮ5ಾಲ ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾDರವರ 4ಾನ, ಮKಾ&?.ೆ *ಾಳ]. 4ಾಡ^ೇ(cid:7)ೆಂದ ಉ?.ೆ@ೕಶTಂದ ಈ Tನ ಅಂದ(cid:8)ೆ T0ಾಂಕ:24-08-2020 ರಂದು ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)ಕು ಕ‘ೇ(cid:22)ಯ ಮುಂ ಾಗದ(cid:10)(cid:28) ಮತು: ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ ನಗರದ ಇತರ ಎXಾ(cid:28) (cid:4)ಾb&ಗಳ(cid:10)(cid:28) ಮತು: ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)Aನ ಎXಾ(cid:28) *ೋಬcಗಳ(cid:10)(cid:28) ^ಾ(ನ(cid:20) ಕ%(cid:19)dರು(cid:24)ಾ:(cid:8)ೆ. ಸದ(cid:22) ^ಾ(ನ(cid:20)ನ(cid:10)(cid:28) Bಾಸಕ(cid:8)ಾದ ಮ5ಾಲ - 6 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾD ರವರ 4ಾನ ಮKಾ&?.ೆ 5ಾವ&ಜIಕರ ಮುಂ?.ೆ *ಾLಾಗುವಂತಹ ಬರಹಗಳನುV ಬ(cid:8)ೆTರು(cid:24)ಾ:(cid:8)ೆ. ಅವfಗLೆಂದ(cid:8)ೆ ''?.ೌಜ&ನ(ದ ಮೂಲಕ (cid:24)ೆಂ>ನಸdಗಳನುV Aೕcd, *ೆಣು P ಮಕhಳ iೕXೆ Xಾj kಾ+& 4ಾSdದಂತಹ (cid:7)ೊXೆಗಡುಕ Bಾಸಕ ಮ5ಾXೆ ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾDರವರ -ರುದ@ *ಾಗೂ ಈ lೇತHದ (cid:8)ೈತರ ಉc-(cid:23)ಾ> T0ಾಂಕ:30-08-2020 ಾನು(cid:4)ಾರ ^ೆc(cid:23)ೆn 11-30(cid:7)ೆh ಪH!ಭಟ0ೆ” ಎಂಬ 3ೕo&(cid:7)ೆಯನುV ಒಳ(cid:23)ೊಂಡ ^ಾ(ನ(cid:20)ನುV iೕXೆ *ೇcದಂ(cid:24)ೆ ಅಳವSdರು(cid:24)ಾ:(cid:8)ೆ. ಅಲ(cid:28)?.ೆ ಸದ(cid:22) 3ೕo&(cid:7)ೆಯನುV ಒಳ(cid:23)ೊಂಡಂ(cid:24)ೆ ಕರಪತHಗಳನುV4Sd (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)A0ಾದ(ಂತ 5ಾವ&ಜIಕ(cid:22)(cid:23)ೆ ಹಂZರು(cid:24)ಾ:(cid:8)ೆ. ಸದ(cid:22) ಬರಹಗಳನುV ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)Aನ 4ಾq Bಾಸಕ(cid:8)ಾದ ಎಂ.%.ಕೃಷPಪQನವರು ಮತು:
5. /6ಯವರು, ಆದ()ರು, rೆ.S.ಎ(cid:11). ತುರು(cid:4)ೇ(cid:7)ೆ(cid:8)ೆ (cid:24)ಾಲೂ(cid:28)ಕು iೕಲhಂಡವರು 4ಾSರುವ ಪHಕಟMೆFಂದ ಜನ;Hಯ Bಾಸಕ(cid:8)ಾದ ಮ5ಾಲ ಜಯ(cid:8)ಾDರವ(cid:22)(cid:23)ೆ ಮತು: ಾರ!ೕಯ ಜನ(cid:24)ಾ ಪ)(cid:7)ೆh 4ಾನ *ಾIKಾ>ದು@, 5ಾವ&ಜIಕರ ಮುಂ?.ೆ ತXೆತ>nಸುವಂ(cid:24)ೆ ಆ>ರುತ:?.ೆ. ಏ(cid:7)ೆಂದ(cid:8)ೆ, iೕXೆ *ೇcದ ಎಂ.%.ಕೃಷPಪQರವರ ಮತು:
5. /6ಯವರ ^ಾ(ನ(cid:20)ನ 3ೕo&(cid:7)ೆಗಳ]. ಶುzÀÝ ಸುctIಂದ ಕೂSರುತ:(cid:4)ೆ. ಆದ@(cid:22)ಂದ iೕXೆ *ೇcದ ವ(A:ಗLಾದ ಎಂ.%.ಕೃಷPಪQ ಮತು:
5. /6ಯವರ -ರುದ@ (cid:7)ೇಸು 0ೊಂ?.ಾFd (cid:7)ಾನೂನು (cid:22)ೕ! ಕHಮ ಜರು>ಸ^ೇ(cid:7)ಾ> (cid:17)ಾHಥ&0ೆ.
9. The offences alleged are the ones punishable under Section 504 and 34 of the IPC. They are admittedly non cognizable. Therefore, a non-cognizable report was rendered by the jurisdictional police, after interaction on 24.08.2020. The Station House Officer then travels to the Court of the Magistrate seeking permission for registration of a crime for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 34 of the IPC, since the offences alleged were non-cognizable, the nod of the Magistrate under Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C. was imperative. The learned Magistrate passes the following order:
"The PSI of Turuvekere Police Station approached with requisition seeking permission to proceed with the investigation of non-cognizable case.-. 7 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 It is mentioned that the complainant lodged the written information about alleged insult caused by the proposed accused persons. As per Section 155(2) of Cr.P.C., there is a bar for the police officer to proceed with the investigation of the non-cognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the case or commit the case for trial. When, police officer received, the information about non- cognizable case, then necessarily seek from permission the Jurisdictional magistrate to proceed with the investigation. By considering the request and information of the complainant, it is revealed that the information in a non-cognizable case is received by the police officer. In the interest of justice, it is proper to accord permission to proceed in accordance with Law."
(Emphasis added)
The learned Magistrate records that the Police Officer receives the information about a non-cognizable offence, then necessarily has to seek permission from jurisdictional Magistrate, to proceed with the investigation. This is the procedure that is narrated in the order. The so called application of mind by the learned Magistrate is only in the words "By considering the request and information of the complainant, it is revealed that the information in a non- cognizable case is received by the police officer. In the interest - 8 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 of justice, it is proper to accord permission to proceed in accordance with Law.
10. The afore-quoted words of the learned Magistrate can by no stretch of imagination be an order, which bears application of mind.
11. The learned Additional State Public Prosecutor seeks to defend this action on the score that it is a lengthy order and it does bear application of mind. I decline to accept the said submission as what is required in law, while the Magistrate grants permission to register a crime, is application of mind, which is ostensibly absent in the afore-quoted paragraph. Therefore, it is not an order that has even a semblance of application of mind. It is rather shocking that Magistrates while granting permission, do not apply their mind and callously grant permission to register the crime while passing orders under Section 155(2) of the Cr.P.C. These acts of passing orders, which bear no reasons or application of mind, have resulted in docket explosion before this Court. Therefore, time and again this Court has directed the - 9 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 Magistrates not to indulge in passing of such orders. The Magistrates are still passing the same orders, as if it is a frolicsome act.
12. In the case at hand, the afore-quoted paragraph is the reason. It is in fact an order which has no reasons. Merely passing lengthy orders, only to fill up the pages, will not mean an order on application of mind. It is the application of mind that is necessary in law and not application of ink; it is not the flow of ink on the paper that is necessary in law, but flow of content depicting such application of mind.
13. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the inevitable conclusion is obliteration of the crime. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER
1 Criminal Petition is allowed.-. 10 - NC:
2024. KHC:44844 CRL.P No.13215 of 2023 2. The proceedings in C.C.No.372/2020 pending before the LXXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-82) stands quashed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.:
1. Sl No.:
18. CT: BHK