The State of Karnataka v. This Criminal Petition is

(By Smt/Sri. Kusumakar, Advocate) AND:

#1. Sambashiva Rao, S/o. Pathuru Venkatasubbaiah, Age: 60 years, 0cc: Agriculture, R/o. Halurnurani Camp, now Residing at Siraguppa, Bellary District, PETITIONERS

#2. The State of Karnataka, by PSI, Siraguppa PoUce Station, Rep. by S.PP. (By Sri, Anand K. Navalgimath, HCGP for R2) RESPONDENTS This Criminal Petition is 482 Cr.P,C., praying that this Hon’ble Court may be D{easd to quash the entire proceedings in Crime NoJ6O/1O (PC 21,’ 2010) pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Sirguppa filed under Section This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following ORDER The petitioners herein who have been arraigned as Accused Nos. 1, 3 & 4 in Crime No. 160/2010 of Sirguppa police station have sought for quashing the investigation on the ground that, though more than 15 months have elapsed from the date of the registration of the case, the police have not fled the final report by completing the investigation ana in the guise of the investigation, the pettoners are being harassed by the respondent-police. 2) I have heard the learned counsel petitioners 3 3) On the contentions urged in this petition namely, that there has been inordinate delay on the part of the respondent-police in completing investigation and filing final report, the prosecution cannot be quashed. 4) In hand, Respondent No.1- Sambashiva Rao. sb. Pathuru Venkatasubbaiah, filed a private complaint before the learned JMFC at Sirguppa alleging offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 nw. 149 IPC against the petitioners herein and others on 20.09.2010. The learned Magistrate, before whom the complaint was presented, referred the complaint to the police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation and report. Based on such reference, the police have registered the case and took-up investigation. May be the respondent-police have not been able to complete tne investigation and to file final report. On this ground as noticed supra, the investigation cannot be quashed. In any case, is necessary to note that the respondent-poiice is under an obligation to complete the investigation at an early date and to file final report as the pendency of 4 investigation would certainly cause inconvenience to the petitioners. Therefore, I find no grounds to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. However respondent-police directed complete investigation at an early date and to file final report. KGRm 5/e JUDGE