- 1 -
NC: 2023:KHC-D:12652 CRL.P No. 102905 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102905 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
MANJUNATHA S/O NINGANAGOUDA PATIL,
AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. NAJIKLAKAMAPUR VILLAGE, TQ. HAVERI, DIST. HAVERI-581110.
… PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH,
(THROUGH HAVERI RURAL POLICE
STATION, HAVERI), PIN-581110.
2. SMT. INDRAVVA W/O SIDDANAGOUDA PATIL,
AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
R/O. NAJIKLAKAMAPUR VILLAGE, TQ. HAVERI, DIST. HAVERI, PIN-581110. … RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.N. HATTI, HCGP FOR R1. R2 SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.482 OF CR.P.C.
SEEKING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 02.07.2020
PASSED BY THE PRINCIPLE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HAVERI IN
C.C.NO.920/2016 (323, 354B, 504, 506, AND 34 OF IPC) THERE BY ALLOWING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PROSECUTION U/SEC.
319 OF CR.P.C. IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 IS
CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- 2 -
ORDER
This petition is filed seeking quashing of the order dated 02.07.2020 passed in CC No.920/2016 by the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Haveri, allowing the application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr.P.C.', for short) whereunder the petitioner came to be added as an additional accused/accused No.4.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
3. In spite of service of notice, respondent No.2 has remained absent and unrepresented.
4. Respondent No.2 filed a complaint dated 28.07.2016 and a case came to be registered in Crime No.153/2016 of Haveri Rural Police Station against 4 accused persons (including this petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2) for offences punishable under Sections 323,
- 3 -
354B, 506 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC', for short). The police after investigation have filed a charge sheet only against 3 accused persons and the name of this petitioner has been shown in Column No.13 of the charge sheet. During the course of trial against 3 accused persons, the complainant i.e. respondent No.2 has been examined as PW.1. In her examination-in-chief, she has deposed that this petitioner along with 3 accused persons quarreled with her and the petitioner has pulled her saree and outraged her modesty and all the 4 accused persons, assaulted her and her children with hands. On the basis of the said evidence, the prosecution has filed an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. praying to add this petitioner as an additional accused/accused No.4.
5. The notice of the said application has been issued to the petitioner. In spite of service of notice, the petitioner did not appear to contest the application. The learned Magistrate, after hearing the arguments has passed the impugned order dated 02.07.2020 allowing the
- 4 -
application of adding this petitioner as a additional accused and directed to issue summons. The said order passed by the learned Magistrate dated 02.07.2020 in CC No.920/2016 has been sought to be quashed in this petition.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that even though the name of this petitioner is stated in the averments of the complaint, but charge sheet could not be filed since the complainant has given her further statement. The evidence of PW-1 is not sufficient to summon this petitioner as an additional accused. The further statement of the complainant has been recorded by the Investigating Officer. The same has not been disputed or denied by PW-1. With this he prayed to allow the petition.
7. Per contra, the learned HCGP would contend that, there is mention of the name of this petitioner in the complaint and PW-1 has stated in her evidence the involvement of this petitioner in committing the offence. The averments of the complaint and the deposition in the examination-in-chief of PW-1, make out a case for
- 5 -
exercising power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. Considering the same, the learned Magistrate has rightly passed by the impugned order allowing the application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. seeking to add this petitioner as an additional accused. With this, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
8. After recording the examination-in-chief of the complainant/PW-1, an application came to be filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. The said notice of the application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has been issued to the petitioner. In spite of service of notice, the petitioner did not appear before the Court to contest the said application.
9. Respondent No.2 is the complainant and she has filed the complaint dated 28.07.2016 against 4 accused persons. On the basis of the said complaint, a case came to be registered in Crime No.153/2016 in Haveri Rural Police Station against 4 accused persons (including this petitioner, who was arraigned as accused No.2 in the FIR) for offences punishable under Sections 323, 354B, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
- 6 -
1 0. After investigation, charge sheet came to be filed only against 3 accused persons. Charge sheet has not been filed against this petitioner and his name is shown in column No.13 of the charge sheet, as the accused not charge sheeted. The complainant has been examined as PW-1 wherein the complainant-PW-1 has deposed in her examination-in-chief that accused Nos.1 to 4 came together quarreled with her and abused her and her son in filthy language and this petitioner pulled her saree and outraged her modesty and all the 4 accused persons assaulted her and her children with hands. The said evidence of PW-1 corroborates the averments in the complaint. PW-1, has also deposed that CWs.7 and 8 have pacified the quarrel. The said deposition of PW-1, if not rebutted, it may lead to conviction of the petitioner. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and others1has held that, "person not named in FIR or though named in FIR but who has not been charge-sheeted can be summoned under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.". In the said case, the Hon'ble (2014) 3 Supreme Court Cases 92
1
- 7 -
Apex Court has also held that, "degree of satisfaction for invoking Section 319 of Cr.P.C. should be of more than prima facie case as exercised at time of framing of charge but short of satisfaction to an extent that evidence, if not rebutted, may lead to conviction of person sought to be added as accused". The Hon'ble Apex Court has further held that, "power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. can be exercised at court inquiry stage, since court has before it material collected by the prosecution, to which it can apply its mind to find out whether any person, who can be accused, has been erroneously or deliberately not arraigned by the prosecuting agency".
11. Considering the averments of the complaint and the examination-in-chief of PW-1, the learned Magistrate has rightly exercised its power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. in allowing the application and summoning this petitioner as additional accused. There are no grounds made out to quash the order dated 02.07.2020 passed in CC No.920/2016 by the learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Haveri.
- 8 -
12. In the result, the following order.
ORDER
The petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
kmv ct:bck
Comments