( By Sri. B A BELLIAPPA, ADV. ) v. ( By Sri.VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, HCGP FOR R-1
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, the petition is allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 156(3), 200, 482
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. No doubt, learned Magistrate has power to refer the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., but the complexity of the offence must require investigation by the Police. When the statutory authority has filed a complaint and the complaint itself discloses offence alleged…
Judgment
1 SRI N S SHANKARANARAYANA ITHAL AGED 68 YEARS S/O SUBBAIAH ITHAL R/O NAGARAVALLI, MAKKIMANE POST, THIRTHAHALLI 2 SRI H Y NARAYANA BHATTA AGED 69 YEARS S/O NAGARA BHATTA R/O BALAGADDE, ARALASURALI POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK 3 SRI T R YAGNANARAYANA UPADHYA AGED 56 YEARS S/O T R RAMAKRISHNA UPADHYA KASHAVAPURA POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK 4 SRI K M DATTATRI AGED 56 YEARS S/O K MANJAPPAIAH KURUVALLI, MELIGE POST, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK 5 SRI U KUMARASWAMY AGED 55 YEARS 2 S/O U VENKATARAMANACHAR BEJJAVALLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK 6 SRI RAJARAM BHATT AGED 54 YEARS S/O B SITARAM BHATTA R/O HIREBETTA MANIPAL. ...PETITIONERS ( By Sri. B A BELLIAPPA, ADV. ) AND : 1 THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS S P P HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE 2 AGRICULTURAL PRODUCES MARKETING COMMITTEE (APMC), APMC YARD, SAGAR ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. ...RESPONDENTS ( By Sri.VIJAYAKUMAR MAJAGE, HCGP FOR R-1 SRI.H.K.THIMMEGOWDA, ADV. FOR R-2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER/MEMO DT.20.2.2010 PASSED BY THE III ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC., SHIMOGA IN PCR NO.56/2010 AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: 3
O R D E R Petitioners have called in question the order/memo dated 20th February 2010 by the J.M.F.C., Shimoga, in P.C.R.No.56/2010.
Respondent No.2 – Agricultural Produces Marketing Committee filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. For violation of Sections 78, 78(a) of the Karnataka Agricultural Produces Marketing (Regulation) Act of 1966 ('Act' for short), which are punishable under Sections 118 and 118-A read with Section 122 of the Act.
Allegation in the complaint is that, the petitioner are traders. They were due to the farmers against the sale of agricultural produces. The said amount was not paid, as such, they have violated the terms and conditions of the licence and also the provisions of the Act. Thus, they have committed an offence punishable under Sections 118 and 118-A red with Section 122 of the Act. 4
Learned Magistrate referred the matter to the Police for investigation and now it is submitted that, on the basis of the investigation, charge sheet is also filed.
Operative part
No doubt, learned Magistrate has power to refer the matter for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., but the complexity of the offence must require investigation by the Police. When the statutory authority has filed a complaint and the complaint itself discloses offence alleged, the Court to take cognizance and proceed on a private complaint filed under Section 200 and 202 or 203 of Cr.P.C., as the case may be. Without doing so, it has referred the matter to the Police, without there being any reason to refer the same for investigation. All the complaints filed before the learned Magistrate need not automatically be referred to the Police for investigation unless it warrants an investigation by the Police. In this case, violation is specifically mentioned in the complaint. The provisions are referred. Facts are disclosed. If that is so, there was no need for reference of the complaint for investigation. Hence, the reference made by the learned 5 Magistrate for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. is bad in law and unwarranted. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The order dated 20th February 2010 P.C.R.No.56/2010, is hereby set aside. A direction is issued to the learned Magistrate to consider the allegation in the complaint and the material produced along with the same if the learned Magistrate finds that the allegation in the complaint and the materials produced by the complainant constitutes an offence, he may proceed in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure under Chapter XV. Sd/- JUDGE KNM/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 156(3), 200, 482.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Karnataka High Court, on 20 Feb 2010. The bench was SUBHASH B ADI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.