SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Kar) 252

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Sri. Vijesh Pillai, S/o. Govindan C. - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Karnataka, Represented By The Station House Officer, K.R. Puram Police Station, Represented By The HCGP and Anr. – Respondents
Writ Petition No.11186 Of 2023 (GM-RES)
Decided On : 16-06-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri. Satyanarayana Chalke S.
For the Respondents: Sri. Mahesh Shetty.

Point of Law: Section 483 of Cr.P.C., reads as duty of High Court to exercise continuous superintendence over Courts of Judicial Magistrates.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 506, 503 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 483, 155, (1), (2) - Registration of crime - Non-cognizable offence - Petitioner is calling in question registration of a crime – Permission can either be sought by complainant or by Station House Officer - Para 9.

Finding of the Court: It is open to a Police Officer or any complainant to approach Magistrate under sub-section (2) of Section 155 of Cr.P.C., to investigate a non-cognizable offence - There is nothing in section to indicate that informant alone should seek permission from Magistrate to commence investigation – Court deem it appropriate to concur such plethora of opinions rendered by various High Courts as what sub-section (1) mandates referring informant to Magistrate - Sub-section (2) remains silent as to who has to obtain permission - Permission can either be sought by complainant or by Station House Officer - Wherefore, it is not necessary for informant alone to knock at doors of learned Magistrate with a requisition seeking permission for registration of FIR, it could be either informant or Station House officer – Court deem it appropriate to quash order granting such permission and resultant registration of crime and direct learned Magistrate to pass order afresh upon requisition made bearing in mind observations made in course of order - Order and Crime registered on strength of order permitting registration stands quashed.

Result: Petition allowed.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No.116 of 2023 by the K.R.Puram Police Station for offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC.

2. Facts adumbrated are as follows:-

The 2nd respondent is the complainant and petitioner is the accused. The 2nd respondent seeks to register a complaint on 11-03-2023 against the petitioner alleging that the petitioner has threatened and intimidated the complainant. The complaint is brought before the K.R.Puram Police Station upon which the Station House Officer seeks permission of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru to register a crime under Section 506 of the IPC for criminal intimidation in the light of the fact that Section 506 of the IPC is a non-cognizable offence and for a non-cognizable offence permission of the Magistrate would be imperative under Section 155 of the Cr.P.C., The learned Magistrate on receipt of requisition permits the crime to be registered on perusal of requisition. On the crime being registered, the petitioner has knocked at the doors of this Court in the subject petition not on the issue of merit of the matter but on non-application of mind on the part of the learned Magistrate granting permission.

3. Heard Sri Satyanarayana S.Chalke, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Mahesh Shetty, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend with vehemence that the learned Magistrate has erred on two counts – one, permission granted on a requisition made by the Station House Officer is erroneous as it is the informant who has to go before the learned Magistrate and seek permission. Sub-section (2) of Section 155 Cr.P.C., permits the learned Magistrate to grant permission. Such grant of permission should be on application of mind. He would contend that the learned Magistrate has just accorded permission without any further observation. Therefore, the proceedings are vitiated.

5. On the other hand, the learned High Court Government Pleader would seek to support the action of the learned Magistrate contending that it is not required for the learned Magistrate to pass an elaborate order while granting permission to register a FIR and seeks dismissal of the petition.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record.

7. A complaint comes to be registered before the K.R. Puram Police Station alleging intimidation or threatening the life of the complainant. The complaint reads as follows:

    “Sub: Complainant against Mr.Vijesh Pillai for threatening me to life.

With regard to the above mentioned subject I would like to bring to you kind attention that a gentleman from kerla named Vijesh Pillai came to meet me at Zuri Hotel, Bengaluru initially asking me for an interview and told me he wants to meet me and discuss above the same. Last Saturday, I went with family to the hotel I mentioned with my family and these after 5 minutes of police introduction, he said was sent by the party secretary, Mr. Govindan to settle the issue between Hon’ble CM of kerala, his family and as a settlement amount they will provide 301 crores INR to leave Bengaluru in a weeks time and go absconding. It I do not agree to the same then he will have to look for alternative option like charging false case against me by putting contrabands is my baggage while traveling or will kill me so that all issues will settle down. They will also do harm to my family member to teach me a lesson, the has given me week time to think and decide.

I hereby request the authorities to please take necessary action to protect me and my family from this threat for life as I have a small son going to school.

I humbly prays to your goodself office to provide me with protection to body and life.

Kerala police used to provide the same in Kerala when I was there.”

                                    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                                    1
                                    2
                                    3
                                    4
                                    5
                                    6
                                    7
                                    8
                                    9
                                    10
                                    11
                                    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                                    supreme today icon
                                    logo-black

                                    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                                    Please visit our Training & Support
                                    Center or Contact Us for assistance

                                    qr

                                    Scan Me!

                                    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                                    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                                    whatsapp-icon Back to top