M. NAGAPRASANNA
Lingesh K. S. , S/o Late Sri Somashekarappa – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to 9 are knocking at the doors of this Court calling in question registration of a crime in Crime No.98 of 2023 for offences punishable under Sections 468, 464, 465, 468, 471, 409, 420 and 120B of the IPC, pending before the XLII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.
2. Facts, in brief, adumbrated are as follows:-
The petitioners at the relevant point in time i.e., between 2016 and 2023 were in the Council, all of them being political entities appointed as Chairman and Members of a particular Committee; the Committee known as Bagair Hukum Saguvali Samithi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Samithi’ for short). Accused No.1/1st petitioner was at the relevant point in time a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Belur constituency. He was the Chairman of the Samithi. Accused Nos.2 to 4 were its members and accused Nos.5 to 10 were the erstwhile members. Accused Nos.11 to 14 are the Tahsildars who were functioning at the relevant point in time at the said place and were Secretaries of the Samithi. The allegation revolves around the functioning of the said Samithi. It is alleged that the Samithi has created records and bartered away Gove
KAPTAN SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Dineshbhai Chandubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat
Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v. State of Maharashtra
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
The court established that vague complaints do not bar investigations into serious allegations of fraud, particularly in public office contexts.
The power entrusted to public representatives is a trust, and they are accountable for its exercise. Investigations into allegations of misuse of power should be conducted regardless of the status of....
Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC do not permit quashing proceedings when prima facie evidence of a crime is present, mandating a trial to ascertain truth.
The need for prima facie evidence to proceed against the accused and the limited scope of the court's jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Point of law: Quash of Criminal proceedings - There cannot be a criminal prosecution against the petitioners herein, which leads to an abuse of process and miscarriage of justice. If the Court fails ....
(1) If once court of competent jurisdiction did not take cognizance of offences when a complaint was made and said order became final, another complaint on same allegations though filed by complainan....
(1) Interim order of stay of investigation during pendency of quashing petition can be passed with circumspection.(2) When investigation by police is in progress, court should not go into merits of a....
The court emphasized that a complaint must disclose an offence and not be frivolous, allowing quashing of proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. when abuse of process is evident.
The power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly and with abundant caution, and criminal proceedings should not be used to settle purely civil disputes.
(1) Quashing of criminal case – High Court is justified in quashing complaint and FIR at a stage when Magistrate had merely directed investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.(2) Quashing of criminal....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.