- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
DR Y V KRISHNAMOORTHY v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2939/2018
BETWEEN:
1. DR. Y.V. KRISHNAMOORTHY
S/O LATE VENKATRAMANA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
SOCIAL WORKER, R/AT BADIADKA PERDALPOST,
RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR,
KASARGODU DISTRICT, KERALA-671551.
2. SMT. ESHWARI @ PARAMESHWARI K W/O SRI SHYAM BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
SOCIAL WORKER, R/AT SITA LAKSHMI HOUSE,
BODUKATTE PERUDALA POST,
KASARAGODU DISTRICT,
KERALA-671 551.
3. SRI. MAHESH KRISHNA BHAT @ MAHESH CHATTNALI S/O KRISHNA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
SOCIAL WORKER, R/AT MATHIHALLI,
THYAGALI POST, SIDDAPURA TALUK,
U.K.-581355.
4. SMT. GEETHA MANJAPPA
W/O MANJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
SOCIAL WORKER, R/AT NO.98,
1
PARASPARA, 3RD CROSS,
13TH BLOCK, 2ND STAGE,
NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU-560054.
5. SMT. ANURADHA PARVATHI
W/O RAGHAVENDRA NARAYAN
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
SOCIAL WORKER, R/AT NO.3, OMH,
4TH CROSS, 11TH MAIN,
AKSHAY NAGAR WEST, BEGURU POST,
BENGALURU-560068.
6. SRI. MAHABALESHWARA BHAT
S/O LATE PARAMESHWARA BHAT,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
SOCIAL WORKER, R/AT NO.90, 3RD CROSS,
SUNDARANAGAR, GOKULA,
BENGALURU-560 054.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SUYOG HERELE E., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KEMPEGOWDA POLICE,
THROUGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. SRI. AMRUTHESH N P
S/O LATE PUTTUSWAMY N.C.
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
LAW PRACTITIONER/ADVOCATE, R/AT NO.28 (103), 10TH MAIN,
KURUBARA HALLI, J.C.NAGAR,
BENGALURU CITY, KARNATAKA.
…RESPONDENTS
2
(BY SRI ROHITH B.J., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI N.P. AMRUTHESH, PARTY-IN-PERSON FOR R-2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2018 AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.3950/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIV A.C.M.M.,
BANGALORE INCLUDING THE COMPLAINT, FIR AND CHARGE
SHEET IN CRIME NO.80/2017 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 228(a) R/W 34 OF IPC AND ALL FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT THERETO WHICH ARE PRODUCED AS
DOCUMENTS-1, 2, 3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
The Police after investigation submitted the charge sheet is filed for the offence under Section 228A r/w Section 34 of IPC alleging that the petitioner has disclosed the identity of the victim in the book published by the petitioner-accused.
2. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. Admittedly, the victim has not raised any objections in disclosing the identity of the victim in the book published by the petitioner-accused. In similar circumstances, the co-ordinate
3
bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.3731/2017 has held that, the respondent No.2, therein who is an advocate and is nothing to do with the victim, has filed a complaint against the petitioners therein for the offence punishable under Section 228A of IPC and the same is impermissible. Hence, this petition also requires to be disposed of in the light of the order dated 6.6.2019 passed in Crl.P.3731/2017. Accordingly, I pass the following order:
The Criminal petition is allowed.
The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.3950/2018 pending on the file of the XXIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, including the complaint, FIR and the Charge sheet in Crime No.80/2017 for the offence punishable under Section 228(a) r/w Section 34 of IPC are hereby quashed. Sd/-
JUDGE
HR
4
Alert