Criminal Petition No. 7043 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15791 CRL.P No. 7043 of 2024 C/W WP No. 12232 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7043 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)-) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 12232 OF 2024 (GM-RES) IN CRL.P No. 7043/2024 BETWEEN:
Legal Reasoning
SRI RAMESH S/O LATE VENKATRAMANAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.16, SHANUMANGALA VILLAGE BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT (BY SRI. MANJUNATH R P., ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE BIDADI POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560 001. 2. M/S LAKSHMI INFO SOLUTIONS A PARTNERSHIP FIRMS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SRI S MANMOHAN NO.579, 10TH D CROSS, WEST OF CHORD 2ND STAGE MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BENGALURU-560 086. …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15791 CRL.P No. 7043 of 2024 C/W WP No. 12232 of 2024 (BY SRI. M.R.PATIL ADV FOR R1 SRI. S. MANMOHAN P-I-P FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO a) SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF REFERENCE DTD 19.01.2024 PASSED BY THE 1st ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RAMANAGARA DIRECTING THE BIDADI POLICE TO REGISTER FIR AND INVESTIGATE. IN WP NO. 12232/2024 BETWEEN: 1. MRS. POORNIMA S NAIK W/O SIDDA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.538, 9TH BLOCK NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560 086. 2. SHRI SIDDA NAIK S/O BHEEMA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.538, 9TH BLOCK NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560 086. 3. SHRI NIRUP S NAIK W/O SIDDA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.538, 9TH BLOCK NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560 086. 4. SHRI NIRANJAN MALLA NAIK S/O L MALLA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.538, 9TH BLOCK NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560 086. (BY SRI. VANDANA P L., ADVOCATE) ...PETITIONERS - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15791 CRL.P No. 7043 of 2024 C/W WP No. 12232 of 2024 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BIDADI POLICE REP BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE 560 001. 2. M/S LAKSHMI INFO SOLUTIONS NO.578 10TH D CROSS WEST OF CHORD ROAD, 2ND STAGE, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM BANGALORE 560 086, REP BY ITS PARTNER, MR S MANMOHAN DE FACTO COMPLAINANT (BY SRI. M.R.PATIL ADV FOR R1 SRI. S. MANMOHAN P-I-P FOR R2) ...RESPONDENTS THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE DE-FACTO COMPLAINANT IN PCR NO. 2/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LD. ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RAMANAGAR AND QUASH THE RESULTANT TO QUASH THE RESULTANT FIR IN CRIME NO. 31/2024 DTD. 31.01.2024 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 448, 324, 380, 506 AND 149 OF IPC ARRAIGNING THE PRESENT PETITIONERS AS THE ACCUSED NO.1, 2, 3 AND 5 RESPECTIVELY (VIDE ANNX-A AND C) AND ETC. THE PETITIONERS FOR THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the registration of the First Information Report (FIR) for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 324, 380, and 506(B) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15791 CRL.P No. 7043 of 2024 C/W WP No. 12232 of 2024 2. Respondent No.2 filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), alleging that he is a tenant in respect of the subject property, of which accused No.1 is the owner, and accused Nos.2 to 7 are relatives of accused No.1. It is further alleged that the accused persons, during the subsistence of the lease period, unlawfully dispossessed him from the property and forcibly took away valuable articles and belongings from the premises described in the complaint schedule. 3. Upon perusal of the complaint, the learned Magistrate, by exercising powers under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., referred the matter to the jurisdictional police for investigation. In doing so, the learned Magistrate also directed the investigating officer to file a charge sheet at the earliest. 4. The Court has heard Sri Shyam Sundar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Manjunath R.P., learned counsel for the petitioner in the connected matter, the second respondent who appeared as party-in- person, and the learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) representing the respondent–State. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15791 CRL.P No. 7043 of 2024 C/W WP No. 12232 of 2024 5. On careful examination of the complaint and the materials placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that the allegations made therein, on the face of it, disclose the commission of cognizable offences. The veracity or truthfulness of these allegations is a matter for investigation, and this Court, at this stage, cannot conduct a detailed inquiry into the disputed facts. It is well settled that the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint cannot be tested in a petition seeking quashing of FIR, especially at the threshold stage when the investigation is yet to be completed. 6. The learned Magistrate, while referring the matter under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., has exceeded jurisdiction in directing the investigating officer to file a charge sheet “at the earliest.” Such a direction fetters the discretion of the investigating agency and is impermissible in law. The Magistrate, while ordering investigation under Section 156(3), may direct the police to investigate and submit a report, but cannot dictate the manner or timeframe in which the charge sheet must be filed, as doing so interferes with the autonomy of the investigative process. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15791 CRL.P No. 7043 of 2024 C/W WP No. 12232 of 2024
Decision
ORDER i. Accordingly, petitions are allowed in part. The order dated 19.01.2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Ramnagar in PCR.No.2/2024 is set aside to directing the Investigating Officer to file a chargesheet at the earliest. ii. The police shall conduct the investigation strictly in accordance with law. However, they shall not take any coercive action against the petitioners and the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation. iii. Pending I.A's does not survive for consideration. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78