IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO
WRIT PETITION No.47297/2018 (GM – RES)
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANIAH
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/O MADAPAN KOPPALU
HEBBERALU: POST HATHGURU HOBLI
MANDYA : DISTRICT – 571 476… PETITIONER
(By Sri HANUMANTHAPPA B HARAVI, ADVOCATE)
THE AMRUTHUR POLICE
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,BANGALORE – 560 001…RESPONDENT
(By Sri I.S. PRAMOD CHANDRA, SPP – II)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT KUNIGAL IN CRIME NO.145/18 IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED ONLY VIDE ANNEXURE – C AND ETC.,
THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
Learned SPP-II takes notice for the respondent.
2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to quash the proceedings against him, which is pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Kunigal, in Crime No.145/2018, vide Annexure-C to the writ petition.
3. It is stated in the complaint that the complainant was promised to get double the amount by one Rajegowda and Goutham and in this connection, the complainant paid an amount of Rs.15.00 lakhs, which he had saved for constructing a house. On 04.08.2018, in the morning at 10.00 a.m., at the instigation of Rajegowda, one Dilip and his friend including Abi came to the place of the complainant and reiterating the promise to get double the amount, collected the said amount from the complainant and asked the complainant to stay for a while and fled away with the money. Thereafter, the complainant realized that he was cheated, thus, a criminal case came to be registered on 04.08.2018 against Rajegowda and Goutham for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with 34 IPC in Crime No.145/2018.
4. Sri Hanumanthappa B Haravi, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that neither the complaint was filed nor FIR was registered against the petitioner, but the petitioner was arrested in the said case and proceedings are being conducted. Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and released on bail in the said case.
5. Sri I S Pramod Chandra, learned SPP-II, would submit that as the matter is still under investigation, the proceedings against the petitioner need not be quashed at this stage and the same may be allowed to continue.
6. A criminal proceeding starts with a complaint to set the criminal law in to motion. Further, the FIR is registered, i.e. registering the commission of offence and it is not mandatory that identity of the accused is to be mentioned. The scope of investigation and steps for investigation cannot be guided or controlled or stalled by writ remedy. In the context and circumstances of the case, the relief under writ jurisdiction cannot scuttle the investigation of the case. I do not find any grounds to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition being devoid of merits is rejected.