CRL.P. NO.6243/2018

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6243/2018

BETWEEN:

SRI. PARAMAHAMSA NITHYANANDA SWAMY

@ RAJASHEKARAN

AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS

S/O ANNAMALAI ARUNACHALAM

R/A NITHYANANDA DHYANAPEETA

KALLUGOPANAHALLI, BIDADI HOBLI

RAMANAGARA TALUK

RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 109

... PETITIONER

(BY SHRI. C.V.NAGESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR

SHRI. K.RAGHAVENDRA, ADVOCATE)

AND

STATE OF KARNATAKA

BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER

BIDADI POLICE STATION

RAMANAGARA DISTRICT

RAMANAGARA, REP BY SPP

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BANGALORE-560 001

... RESPONDENT

(BY SHRI. SANDESH J. CHOUTA, SPL.PP)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C PRAYING

TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 16.07.2018 PASSED IN

S.C.NO.86/2014 PRESENTLY PENDING ON THE FILE OF III

ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGARA

ORDERING

THE

APPOINTMENT

OF

A

BASAVARJU

AS

THE

TRANSLATOR TO TRANSLATE THE EVIDENCE OF C.W.1-LENIN

FROM TAMIL TO ENGLISH OR KANNADA AND ETC.

CRL.P. NO.6243/2018

2

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND

RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 29.11.2018, COMING ON FOR

PRONOUNCEMENT

OF

ORDER,

THIS

DAY,

THIS

COURT

PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

This petition is presented by accused No.1 in

S.C.No.86/2014 on the file of III Addl. District & Sessions

Judge, Ramanagara, challenging order dated 16.07.2018,

appointing

Shri

Basavaraju,

Assistant

Lecturer

as

Translator to translate the deposition of CW.1 from Tamil

language to English or Kannada languages.

2. Heard Shri C.V.Nagesh, learned Senior Advocate for

the petitioner and Shri Sandesh J.Chouta, learned

Additional Advocate General for the State.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are, petitioner is

facing trial for offences punishable under Sections 376,

377, 420, 114, 201, 417 read with 415, 506(1), 120(B)

of IPC. Upon petitioner pleading ‘not guilty’, the case

was set down to 16.07.2018 for fixing the date for

CRL.P. NO.6243/2018

3

commencement of trial. On that day, prosecution filed a

memo requesting the Trial Court to appoint a Translator

to translate the evidence of CW.1, Shri Lenin, proposed

to be recorded from 08.08.2018. The memo was

accepted and one Basavaraju, was appointed as the

Translator.

4. Assailing the impugned order, Shri Nagesh learned

Senior Advocate urged following contentions:

• that the impugned order has been passed only on

the basis of a memo filed by the prosecution even

without mentioning the name of the Translator. It

is stated in the memo that CW.1 – Lenin knows

English & Kannada to certain extent. CW.1 was not

summoned to the Court for the learned Trial Judge

to record his satisfaction that CW.1 did not have

sufficient

knowledge

of

English

or

Kannada

languages;

CRL.P. NO.6243/2018

4

• that the said Shri Basavaraju is a charge sheet

witness;

• that the Translator being a prosecution witness,

there is every possibility of him being guided by the

Investigating Officer; and

• that neither the defence counsel nor the learned

Sessions Judge know Tamil language. Therefore,

they cannot make out if the evidence of CW.1 is

truthfully translated.

5. Opposing the petition, Shri Chouta submitted that

CW.1 is a Tamilian and knows Tamil language fluently;

and that prosecution has stated in the memo that CW.1

would not be in a position to satisfactorily answer the

questions put to him by both prosecution and the

defence lawyer. Shri Basavaraju is a Lecturer working in