Criminal Petition No. 6291 of 2024 · Karnataka High Court · 2024

BY KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT POLICE STATION, REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU - 560 001.

2. XXX Digitally signed by NANDINI MS Location: High Court of Karnataka …PETITIONER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.R. PATIL., HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.594/2024 (CR.NO.316/2016) OF KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT POLICE, ON THE FILE OF LV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-56) AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 144, 341, 307, 427, 332, 353, 435 R/W 149 OF IPC, SEC. 3 OF PREVENTION OF DAMAGE TO THE PUBLIC PROPERTY ACT AND SEC. 2(B) AND 2(A) OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:45931 CRL.P No. 6291 of 2024 PREVENTION OF DESTRUCTION AND LOSS OF PROPERTY ACT AGAINST THE PRESENT PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER

1. Accused No.4 in SC No.594/2024 pending on the file of LV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.316/2016 registered by Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Sections 2(B) and 2(A) of the Karnataka Prevention of Destruction and Loss of Property Act, 1981 and Sections 143, 144, 341, 307, 427, 332, 353, 435 and 149 of IPC, is before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings as against him.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. FIR in Crime No.316/2016 was registered by Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 332, 149 and 435 of IPC and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45931 CRL.P No. 6291 of 2024 Property Act, 1984, against unknown persons and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed as against 11 persons for the aforesaid offences. It appears that though the charge sheeted offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions Judge, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of the charge sheeted offences and after framing charges, had recorded the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. When the matter was at the stage of passing the judgment, learned Magistrate having realized that he had no jurisdiction to try the case, had committed the case to Court of jurisdictional Sessions Judge and the case is now pending before the Court of LV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in SC No.594/2024. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that charge sheet witnesses, who were examined by the learned Magistrate in CC No.6735/2023 had turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. Therefore, there is no purpose in conducting the trial afresh by the learned Sessions Judge. He submits that pendency of the criminal case has been causing untold hardship to the petitioner. Omnibus allegations are made against the - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:45931 CRL.P No. 6291 of 2024 accused persons in the charge sheet. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned HCGP has opposed the petition. He submits that trial was conducted by the learned Magistrate, who had no jurisdiction to try the case and therefore, evidence recorded if any, by the learned Magistrate was one without jurisdiction. He submits that the case is now committed to the jurisdictional Sessions Court and summons has already been issued to accused persons. It is for the accused persons to appear before the jurisdictional Sessions Court and participate in the trial. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. The material on record would go to show that charge sheet was filed in the present case after investigation, as against 11 persons and the charge sheeted offences are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions Judge. Learned Magistrate after filing of charge sheet, instead of committing the case to the jurisdictional Sessions Court had himself tried the case and even proceeded to frame charges and record the evidence of charge sheet witnesses. It is only at the later stage when he came to know that he had no jurisdiction to try the - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:45931 CRL.P No. 6291 of 2024 case, he had committed the case to the Court of jurisdictional Sessions Judge and the case is now pending before the jurisdictional Sessions Judge in SC No.594/2024. The learned Sessions Judge has now issued summons to all the accused persons. At this stage, the petitioner is before this Court.

7. As rightly contended by learned HCGP, even if the witnesses have turned hostile to the case of the prosecution during the course of trial conducted by the learned Magistrate in CC No.6735/2023, it is of no consequence since the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the charge sheeted offences. The entire proceedings before the learned Magistrate is vitiated for the simple reason that he had no jurisdiction to try the case. That being so, evidence if any, recorded by him is of no significance and the same cannot be taken into consideration. On the ground that witnesses examined before the learned Magistrate had turned hostile in proceedings which was conducted by him without jurisdiction, the prayer made by the petitioner in the present petition cannot be granted. Under the circumstances, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file necessary application before the - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:45931 CRL.P No. 6291 of 2024 jurisdictional Sessions Court under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. seeking his discharge.

8. In the event, petitioner files such an application, the learned Sessions Judge shall consider the same on merits without being influenced by the order passed by this Court in this petition. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN