K.N. Keshavanarayana, J

(1) In this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner, who is a practising advocate at Bhalki Taluk IN Bidar district, has sought for quashing the complaint and the FIR IN Crime No.112/2010 of Bhalki Town Police registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the Deputy Secretary, DPAR, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.

(2) Few facts relevant are as under:- One Veeranna Sanganna Biradar, resident of Bhatambra Village in Bidar District had filed an application for the grant of pension payable to freedom fighters. Enquiry on the said application had been started on 30.4.2010 before the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Karnataka, DPAR, M.S.Building, Bangalore. On account of the failing health of the applicant as he is aged over 100 years, the applicant could not travel all the way from Bidar to Bangalore, therefore, he sent his son Ramesh Biradar along with the petitioner herein, a practising advocate, to attend the enquiry before the Deputy Secretary at Bangalore. Accordingly, the petitioner and the son of the applicant attended the enquiry before the Deputy Secretary, on 30.4.2010. During the enquiry certain submissions were made by the petitioner as Counsel representing the applicant. The Deputy Secretary appears to have recorded the submissions made by the Counsel and the son of the applicant in the proceedings sheet. The Under Secretary also was stated to be present during the enquiry.

The petitioner herein stated to have refused to sign the proceedings sheet. The refusal on the part of the petitioner herein to sign the proceedings sheet recorded during the enquiry before Deputy Secretary was reported to the Principal Secretary, DPAR, who in turn directed the Under Secretary to lodge a complaint to the jurisdictional police. Accordingly, on 11.05.2010, the Under Secretary, DPAR sent a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Bidar District, alleging that the refusal on the part of the petitioner herein to sign the proceedings of the enquiry recorded by the Deputy Secretary on 30.04.2010 amounts to arrogance, therefore, he sought for registration of a criminal case against the petitioner herein to prosecute him. On receipt of the said complaint, the Superintendent of Police forwarded the same to the Police Inspector, Bhalki Town Police Station, for registration of the case and to investigate the matter. Accordingly, the Bhalki police registered the case in Crime No. 112/10 for the offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC, submitted the FIR to the jurisdictional Magistrate and took-up investigation. It. Is at this stage, on coming to know of the registration of the case, the petitioner presented this petition seeking to quash the complaint and FIR.

Later on the point of territorial jurisdiction the case was transferred to Vidhana Soudha Police Station, where the case in Crime No.49/10 came to be registered on 12.08.2010. Subsequently the Investigating Officer after completing investigation on 04.11.2010 filed the charge sheet against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 180 of IPC, based on which C.C.No.49148/2010, has been registered.

(3) It is the contention of the petitioner that the allegations made in the complaint even if read as a whole and accepted at its face value does not make out any case muchless any criminal offence and that the complaint was filed only with a view to harass this petitioner, who is a practicing advocate in Bhalki Town and to coerce his client to withdraw the application for grant of pension. IT is also the contention of the petitioner that the complaint is motivated, actuated with malafides, and it is abuse of the official position.

(4) I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional S.P.P. appearing for the respondent-State.

It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the offence for which now the charge sheet has been filed is not attract