INTHHSHHHJCOURTCH?KARNATAKACHRCUFFBBNCH
ATDHARWAD w"ak
DATED nus THE 02"" DAY OF FEBRUAR_Yfw2fi'»%V_'Q«.j:J
BEFORE
THE H()N'BLE MR. JUSTICE A_RA;LiT'NA§§Am.'5':._,,,_
CRL.P.NO.4'7_83V/20VO9'V' A
BETWEEN: 'V
I. Subhas Narayana Pui"a.k'e.'
S/0. Narayan Pukafe T
Aged 62 yearsgy I . »
R/o. Maha1iB'g?~P1ir,
Tq: Mudhp},VQié.t.:{.B'ag_a,lkQt.'-7
2. Sadashiv-.Sh'a_nkéi?_.app--a Nyarnago"ud
Aged: 45 yéa7rts,t.t
R/0. .L1akshminag'a1-,d _
Hunachduif Roadd-,_ Jan--1khafid'i.
3. G.B.;KoujaIag.i'A 'd
S/{_v.'~:'«Ba_s'appa Kdouyxlagi
'"Age'd: Years, Occ: Advocate,
R./'d;V.JamAa3§ha'r;-di, Dist: Bagalkot.
S'.R§Kadagi'i.
V V 'V ' S/o';««._Ra,.__m'a-p«--pa Kadagi
é Aged... years, Occ: Advocate,
" 7-V"'R/Q.JaIi1-khandi, Dist: Bagalkot.
kt Kale, Advocate.)
(mmrvwxw
...Petiti0ners.
AND:
Bapusab Hasansab Bagawan
Aged about 44 years,
R/o. Jarnkhandi, Dist: Bagaikot.
(By Sri.ParshWanath V. G-unjal, Advocate.)
This Criminal Petition is filed iii}/S:.i4ilSf2u'Cr:.iP;--Ci§'~»bvy'Vt.h.ei'
advocate for the petitioner praying t19ia_t't_hi'is H'c.n"b.1e C;ourt'._V
may be pleased to set aside sth-e_ orderdated"j8_/8/2§00i9_7
passed by the JMFC, Jamakhairi-di, inV§3'..C.N7o.i1"/2000
(C.C.No.37/2009) and quash the___eVi*stvire_»proceedings in the
said case. " i
This petition coming day, the
Court made the fol1o:wi_ng:i'° * V. ' '
Though this Iisted today for admission,
having regard toiiiithienatuire of the prayer sought for in this
sssiissgiiissi U/"S._ec.482 of C1'.P.C., it is taken for final
disposai-i'___biy"'vitii*i.e_ dohsent of the learned counsei for the
i'v:'ggpet.itione"r"' ari-ditiie learned High Court Government Pieader.
.1 -Tirieggisr arsigslmeiints on merits are heard.
s..._ar"""'"'"~«~"
2) The accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.3.W-2009
('P.C.No.1/2000) on the file of the learned
Jamakhandi, have challenged in this petitionthe~-corriecétiress,'Vlii"
of order dated 18/8/2009
registering a Criminal Case,*againls"t_ithese""'pAe.t'i_tiojiersf>
accused. The petitioners have alsi'o.i_so.u'ght"for_:nduaishing of
entire proceedings in came to be
registered on the fileof the"s'arlnelCiotlirtlilpursiiant to the said
impugned order.
3) lleading to the present
petition U/Siec.i48d2 as under:
The"'---virvespondent herein, namely
"S/o.Hasansab Bagawan, filed his
" -El/S ec.200 of Cr.P.C. in
against all these present
'.V_petitiione_rsli for the offences U/Secs.120-A,
209, 403 and 420 r/w.Sec.34 of IPC.
e._}\._lft'er'i the said complaint was filed, the same
"was referred to the police U/Sec.i56(3) of
Cr.P.C. for investigation. After investigation
the police submitted 'B summary' report.
said report was opposed by the compla_iA"nl*ant:i:'.i§"'* ii
by filing his objections to itpgon V
Thereafter the learned
sworn statement of the coiinpil-ainanVt.."_,on' _
3/7/2003 and his rurlméggrttiit state-rn_e'nt_i'_= i
10/8/2005. i
b) On the baisisersihe agvtérsmeims in
the said complaint sltatelment of
the compI.a.ir:.:,anit:_,:i'::theipggarneq./JiMFC"piassed the
i1npugnedi.,V.o;€_dle:r directing
registratiioindof against all the
accused and issuing
summons" again st ._thern
.fr°~S;r.it:.A.tnil iKa'1"e','l the learned counsel for the
petiti_iot:e_r's»accjusledi"strongly contended that, the learned
C0..Il11mVit.te'd--'lserious error in passing the impugned
....;5v;@__er-'»»dated..1.3:'/8/2009 and inasmuch as, the said order does
_di.s"c»lo.se for what offences process has been issued
ag.:ai'n-»st-lithe petitioners-accused. He further contended that
,_s.i.<"w"~---~"
'7»out',Vagair1.stH; the petitioners--accused, the
the learned JMFC has not whispered in the impugn.e:d.,,i_:o.r,der
about the 'B summary' report submitted
concerned after investigation of the_c,a_se
passed U/Sec.l56(3) of Cr.P.C. enngeeteempireujgfi'
respondent--eomplainant
proceedings in the said.’ crime-i-nal”–c’ase deserve to be
quashed.
5) Per cointifya»,ivSr:i’-.,P§}/iGuinjal,the learned counsel
for the respoiri.de:nitj-_com’p<lai'riarit,i iérhile supporting the
impugned o,rde_r.ofith-erleairned,JMFC contends that, though
the learned niiopptiiispecifically stated in his
imvpugnedftioirder as what offences process has been
issued1against«_the'"–accused therein, the facts alleged in the
compia-i,nt«.i'anidisgtaitted in the sworn statement clearly make
offences
en,,U/jse[eesi,409,, 420 and 120-A of IPC and therefore the
order cannot be interfered with only on this
ieefgtencihtnical ground. He further contended that, the averments
:__~_f-r”\__r__\__
and ._v:””-Vthereiforet V entire”
in the complaint and the sworn statement of-.pthe
complainant clearly disclose the commission
offences by the accused therein and therefo_r,e_:”V.avlii~i..:fu.rther–..V9°
proceedings in the said criminal case cannfot’-..be._’q’ua’sh.r;’cl..,gs
prayed for by the petitioners here-i..n.
6) Stated in brief. case'” lithe pii*os’ee’1ition as
averred in his complaint U/Sec.200 of
Cr.P.C. before the.vl’e:arp11ed::i_JMF.C V
a)W V father and
accused _l\l_ioi;’.:’..\.q’i.oi5nitl3i.:i”helcl the land bearing
*”rneasuring 8 acres
situated The father of the
conrplaiiinant,.iname_l_yv late Hasansab Bagawan,
ii.io:w_,rii1i:Ved_.i :4-iéaeres and accused No.2 owned
in the said land. Acquisition
pro.i;’eed.ings.–‘were initiated in respect of the
_i<._entire" Vvfii§'i'1.acres of the said land. Award also
to be passed. The father of the
compilainant and accused No.2 were entitled
"to 50% of the award amount.
\»’
attorney. Thought the records disclose that the comp’l”a,inant
produced as many as six documents which _..h_a_V.€:’fibei€.n
marked as Exs.P.l to 13.6, the said power
one of the said documents.
8) On careful reading._v:o-f_ the” .averim.:en~.ts”””in: the”?
complaint and the sworn,.statevm*ein’t–.ptithei lic’ornp”i§ainant it
could be seen that, no assigned by
the complainantgsaid power of
attorney. atguntents, the learned
counsel submitted the said
power of attorney by late father of the
COITlplE1iI”1:dI1t_A.iI]iil:£i”l_tgl;1l: of accused N0.i, but accused No.3
unconnected with the execution of the
saidiip.o’w_er of”a.t_to~r’r’1’ey and therefore issuing process against
acr;usediiil”i’~io;’-3′. and 4 on the allegation of the complainant
.1 power of attorney came to be falsely created
A”ii_”-.b_y’««.acc§used No.1 in collusion with and in connivance of
act-rused N0s.3 and 4 cannot be sustained in law. Therefore
r_Mg”v—-~v\.u.
since the existence of power of attorney said to haxifegbeen
executed by the father of the complainant
accused No}. is not in dispute, I feel that non__pr~oVdtii.cti_onii ‘of,
either original or copy of the said power of1att.o3′-nie*3_ztat’the
stage of taking cognizance and’ issuin”g_procee.s’s”‘against theft»
accused is not fatal to the case ofiiithe ctompilainantfli
9) On careful order it
could be seen that has ordered to
register the case’ Register No.3 and to
issue sumrrions not specified in the
impugned offences alleged in the
complaint«..th.eiipr*«o9_ie’$’S issued against the accused
submitted by the learned counsel
for the”petit’io’n,ers}accused, the learned Magistrate has not
i”:fioibs_erved””‘ impugned order, anything about the
4:.:if:iBisu:rnr;’:ary5i report submitted by the police after
of the investigation. Therefore I am of the
ii”~..icorisidered opinion that since no case is made out by the
.»…s”*w»~»–=–
I0
complainant against accused Nos.3 and 4 for any of» the
offences alleged in the complaint issuing proceys’s’.agai.n’st
them cannot be sustained in law. Besid_es~.__t’h’_i’s,i’4 tih’e__i’=~
impugned order has to be set aside:;.ifori_lt’n«ei”«reas’ons,qt_hait__it’
does not disclose the offences which ‘process ordieredik
to be issued against the accused
10) For the reasonsiiatioreisayild; petition is
allowed in part? 18/8/2009
passed by the Jamakhandi, in
P.C.N’o.1/2{)’OiO” of Criminal Case
against acciii’seid- and issuing process
against aside. Further, all further
are hereby quashed only as
again”s.t’5facc’us’cVd Tnos.3 and 4 therein. The matter is
ii’v:’giireirntanded”to=§the”learned JMFC with a direction to consider
4: report, the averments in the complaint and the
V.”.””..3wo’rnh”staternent of the complainant afresh, apply his mind
V”-._toi”t.he contents thereof, and then dispose of the matter in
r’~’-§\~””‘”‘*-»–‘”‘
I1
accordance with law stating specifically as to forfwhich
offences and against which of the accused
Criminal Case is to be registered and pi’QQ(i§S.s,. £0
issued. N0 order as to costs.
i iif3’U:2<;E
Mrkl –