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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

W.A. No.100262/2021 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN

1.

SRI LAXMAN S/O SRI JARANAPPA

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

ASSISTANT ENGINEER

PWD SUB-DIVISION, KOPPAL

KOPPAL DISTRICT-583 231.

2 . SRI. RAVI PRASAD S/O. S RAJANNA

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

PWD SUB-DIVISION

R/AT NO.22, SRI LAXMINARASIMHA NILAYA

V.N RESIDENCY ROAD

CHIKKALASANDRA

BANGALORE-560-061

3.

SRI SELVA KUMAR S/O BALAKRISHNA.T

AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

JUNIOR ENGINEER

C/O D.NO.D-4, KEB QUARTERS

BEHIND ESI HOSPITAL

RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 010

4.

SRI.H VISHWANATH S/O SRI SADASHIVAPPA

AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,

2

ASSISTANT ENGINEER

M.I. SUB DIVISION

HALIYAL POST

UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT

5 . SRI RAJSHEKAR KATTIMANI

S/O MARIYAPPA KATTIMANI

AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,

WORKING AS A JUNIOR ENGINEER

MI SUB-DIVISION, KUSHTAGI

KOPPAL DISTRICT-583231

6.

SRI SHANKARGOWDA PATIL

S/O SRI DHARMAGOUDA

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

WORKING AS A JUNIOR ENGINEER

PRE SUB-DIVISION

RON, GADAG DISTRICT.

7 . SRI.M. LLIYAS S/O IBRAHIM SAB

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

WORKING AS A JUNIOR ENGINEER

PRE SUB DIVISION

YALBURGA, YALBURGA DISTRICT.

8 . SRI OMKAR MURTHY

S/O SRI VEERACHAR. B

AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

WORKING AS A JUNIOR ENGINEER

PRE SUB DIVISION

YALBURGA, YALBURGA DISTRICT-583231.

9.

SRI V.S. HALLI S/O SADASHIVAPPA HALLI

AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,

WORKING AS A JUNIOR ENGINEER

PRE SUB-DIVISION, SINDAGI

VIJAYAPURA DISTRICT.

10 . SRI R. SHARANAPPA GOUDA

S/O LATE SRI SHIVANAGAPPA

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS

3

WORKING AS ASSISTANT

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

MINOR IRRIGATION SUB- DIVISION

YADIGIRI,

R/AT NIJLINGAPPA COLONY

RAICHUR.

11 . SRI. THOTAGANTI B.C.

S/O CHANNAPPA TOTAGANTI

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

RETIRED ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

PWD SUB-DIVISION

KUSTAGI,

R/AT HOUSING COLONY

NEAR MARUTHI TEMPLE

MANTUR ROAD, MUDHOL

BAGALKOT DISTRICT-583231

12. SRI ZAKIR HUSSAIN S/O B. ABDUL LATEEF

AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

MINOR IRRIGATION

SUBDIVISION, KUSHTAGI

KOPPAL DISTRICT-583231

...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.F V PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYATH RAJ

DEPARTMENT, VIKAS SOUDHA

BANGALORE-560 001.

2.

THE REGISTRAR

KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA

DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

BANGALORE-560 001.

4

3.

THE INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE

ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU

KHANIJA BHAVAN

BANGALORE-560 001.

4.

THE POLICE INSPECTOR

ANTI- CORRUPTION BUREAU

KOPPAL

KOPPAL DISTRICT-583 231.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.G.K.HIREGOUDAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R1,

SRI.ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE FOR R2,

SRI.SUNIL S DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 & R4)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH

COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON’BLE COURT TO,

A) SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2021 PASSED IN WP

NOS.63379-80/2016 C/W WP NOS. 58381-385/2016, 61291-

302/2016, 65259/2016 AND 107657/2017 BY THE LEARNED

SINGLE JUDGE IN DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS

AGAINST THE APPELLANTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND

EQUITY, B) AND GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTIONS

AS

THIS

HON’BLE

COURT

DEEMS

FIT

UNDER

THE

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INCLUDING COSTS, IN THE

INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR

COMING

ON

FOR

‘PRONOUNCEMENT

OF

JUDGMENT’, THIS DAY, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J.,

DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

5

JUDGEMENT

Writ petitions filed by the petitioners are disposed of

by common order dated 26.02.2021, wherein the writ

petitions invoking Articles 226, 227 of Constitution of India

and Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short,

‘Cr.P.C.’) are rejected.

2.

The prayer made in the writ petitions would

read as under:

“Call for records relating to the issue of the

order/complaint bearing No.Gra.Aa.Pa.35 Enq

2015,

Bengaluru,

dated

03.10.2016

(Annexure-A) f respondent No.1 and FIR dated

07.11.2016 in Crime No.3/2016 on the file of

the learned Principal District and Sessions

Judge, Koppal and quash the same.”

3.

The petitioners are before this Court invoking

Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961. Brief

facts of the case are as under:

6

3.1

The complaint was registered in Cr.No.3/2016

by Anti Corruption Bureau police station, Koppal Taluk,

Koppal

District

against

the

petitioners

alleging

misappropriation of funds. The further details relating to

the above said complaint is not necessary for adjudication

of this case. The copy of FIR was sent to District and

Sessions Judge, Koppal as required under law. The

petitioners

being

aggrieved

by

the

complaint

and

registration of FIR approached this Court by filing a

petition in W.P.No.63379-80/2016 and connected matters.

3.2

The petitioners have essentially prayed to

quash the FIR in Crime No.3/2016 and to quash all further

proceedings before the Principal District and Sessions

Judge, Koppal pursuant to the above-referred FIR. The

learned Single Judge after hearing the petitioners and the

respondents in terms of the detailed order dated:

26.02.2021, deemed it appropriate to dismiss the writ

petitions. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petitions

the petitioners have preferred the instant appeal. The

7

appeal is heard on the question of maintainability under

Section 4 of Karnataka High Court Act.

4.

Learned counsel for the appellants, Sri.F.V.Patil

justifying the appeal has placed reliance on the following

judgements:

1. Gurushanth Pattedar vs. Mahaboob Shahi

Kulburga Mills and Another [ILR 2005 KAR

2503]

2. Shreemad Jagadguru Shankaracharya Shree

Shree Raghaveshwara Bharathi Swamiji vs.

State of Karnataka, Girinagara Police Station

and Others [ILR 2015 KAR 842]

3. Ram Kishan Fauji vs. the State of Haryana

and Others [(2017) 5 SCC 533]

4. Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs vs.

Asim Shariff and Others [ILR 2018 KAR 2915]

5. Sri.Sachin Narayan vs. The Income Tax

Department

and

Others

(Writ

Appeal

No.3611/201 and connected matters decided

on 17.09.2019)

8

6. India Awake For Transparency vs. Mr Azim

Hasham Premji and Others (Writ Appeal

No.224/2021 c/w. Writ Appeal No.242/2021

decided on 22.02.2021)

5.

By placing reliance on the above judgements,

Sri.F.V.Patil would submit that the order passed by the

learned Single Judge is to be construed as an order passed

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the

exercise of its original jurisdiction and as such would

submit that the appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka

High Court Act is maintainable.

6.

In support of his submission he would also

refer to the prayer made in the writ petitions and would

submit that the petitioners have not questioned any

proceeding before the Court subordinate to the High Court,

as such the petitions cannot be construed as the petitions

filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and

Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

7.

Further, the learned counsel would submit that

the

prayer

made

in

the

writ

petitions

would

in

9

unmistakable terms lead to the conclusion that the

petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for

the appellants, Sri.F.V.Patil that in view of the circular

issued by the High Court, all petitions filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to q

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