The absence of essential ingredients for the alleged offences, particularly under Section 353 IPC, justified the quashing of proceedings.

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:

"i) Wherefore, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the entire proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.141/2023 of Puttur Town Police Station, D.K., District for the offence punishable under Section 143 , 147, 341 , 269 , 353 , 323 , 427 , 506 r/w 149 of Indian Penal Code and Section 2(a) and 2(b) of KPDLP Act pending on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Puttur, Dakshina Kannada, which is produced atANNEXURE-'A', in the above case, in the interests of justice."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition, learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the impugned complaint dated 15.08.2021 in order to point out that necessary ingredients constituting the offence punishable under Section 353 of IPC were missing/absent in the complaint coupled with the fact that the remaining offences are non-cognizable offences, the impugned proceedings without seeking necessary permission under Section 152(2) of Cr.P.C. in relation to the non-cognizable offences deserve to be quashed.

4. In support of his submissions, he places reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case ofManik Taneja and another v. State of Karnataka and another reported in(2015) 7 SCC 423 and this Court in the cases of Athaulla Jokatte and others v. The State of Karnataka and another inCrl.P.No.6314/2022 , Sailaja P.V.S. v. The State of Karnataka and another inCrl.P.No.9452/2022 and Shri Vijay Tata v. State of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.9366/2018 .

5. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. In Manik Taneja's case supra, the Apex Court held as under:

"8. The legal position is well settled that when a prosecution at the initial stage is asked to be quashed, the test to be applied by the Court is as to whether the uncontroverted allegations as made, prima facie, establish the offence. It is also for the Court to take into consideration any special features which appear in a particular case to consider whether it is expedient and in the interest of justice to permit the prosecution to continue. Where, in the opinion of the Court, the chances of ultimate conviction is bleak and no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue, the Court may quash the proceeding even though it may be at a preliminary stage.

9. In State of T.N. v. Thirukkural Perumal [ (1995) 2 SCC 449 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 387] considering the scope of Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR/criminal proceedings, this Court has held as under : (SCC p. 450, para 4)

“4. … The power of quashing an FIR and criminal proceeding should be exercised sparingly by the courts. Indeed, the High Court has the extraordinary or inherent power to reach out injustice and quash the first information report and criminal proceedings, keeping in view the guidelines laid down by this Court in various judgments (reference in this connection may be made with advantage to State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] ) but the same has to be done with circumspection. The normal process of the criminal trial cannot be cut short in a rather casual manner.”

10. So far as the issue regarding the registration of FIR under Section 353 IPC is concerned, it has to be seen whether by posting a comment on the Facebook page of the traffic police, the conviction under that section could be maintainable. Before considering the materials on record, we may usefully refer to Section 353 IPC which reads as follows:

“353. Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty.— Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person being a public servant in the execution of his duty as such public servant, or with