- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE. V.SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO.1109 OF 2021

BETWEEN:

SRI CHIRAG R MEHTA,

S/O RAKESH KUMAR MEHTA,

AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,

RESIDING AT NO.125/2,

'MOHINI NIVASA',

MAHANTHA LAYOUT,

IN FRONT OF MARATA HOSTEL,

BULL TEMPLE ROAD,

BENGALURU - 560 019.

... PETITIONER

(BY SRI MURTHY D NAIK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,

BY COTTON PET POLICE STATION,

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

HIGH COURT BUILDING,

BENGALURU - 560 001.

... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI V.S.VINAYAKA, HCGP)

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION IS FILED

UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING THAT

THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE

THE ORDER DATED 12.10.2021, PASSED IN SPECIAL

C.C.NO.808/2021 BY THE L ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND

SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE, BENGALURU

(CCH-51), ON THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION-227 OF

- 2 -

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, FILED BY THE

PETITIONER, AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION COMING ON

FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE

FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Though this matter is listed for admission, with

the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for

final disposal.

2.

Heard Sri.Murthy D. Naik, learned counsel

for the revision petitioner and Sri.V.S.Vinayaka,

learned High Court Government Pleader and perused

the records.

3.

The present revision petition is filed by the

accused, which has been unsuccessful in getting

discharged in Spl.C.C.No.808/2021 on the file of

L Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge & Special Court,

Bengaluru.

4.

The brief facts of the case are as under:

- 3 -

A complaint came to be lodged by Sri.Heeraram

Patel on 28.01.2020 stating that his son Rahul H.Patel

got missing. Police investigated the matter and filed

charge sheet against the accused for the offence

punishable under Section 364A and 506 of I.P.C.

Accused

entered

appearance

and

after

getting

enlarged on bail filed an application seeking discharge

of an offence punishable under Section 364A IPC. The

said application was opposed by the prosecution.

Learned Judge after hearing the arguments dismissed

the application filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C.

seeking discharge of revision petitioner for the offence

under Section 364A IPC.

5.

Sri.Murthy D.Naik, learned counsel for the

revision petitioner vehemently contended that on bear

reading of the complaint and statements recorded

under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. by the learned

Magistrate of the victim boy, no ingredients of

whatsoever has made out against the accused for the

offence punishable under Section 364A IPC. He further

- 4 -

contended that at the most there are only material

available on record for the offence that would invoke

was under Section 363 IPC, which is tried by the

learned Magistrate and unnecessarily the accused has

been tried before the Special Court. He further

contended that the material on record clearly indicate

that there was no threat raised in the entire incident

as could be seen from the statement of victim boy

before the Investigation agency or the complaint

averments or for that matter the statements recorded

under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C by the jurisdictional

Magistrate. He further contended that the accused

cannot be charged for a higher offence when the

material available on record indicates lesser offence

and thus sought for allowing the revision petition.

6.

Per contra learned High Court Government

Pleader supported the impugned order contending

that materials available on record prima facie indicate

that the boy has been picked up near metro station

and he has been taken to unlawful custody by the

- 5 -

accused and thereafter there was a telephonic call

made to the father of the victim boy and this itself

would clearly indicate that accused nurtured wit