The Karnataka High Court has passed a judgment on 22nd February, 2023 quashed an order of the sessions court prosecuting a person as accused under section 319 of CrPC whom the police had earlier given clean chit in investigation. This was in the case of Sachin v. State of Karnataka (CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201553 OF 2022) and this is presided over by a single judge bench of Justice V Srishananda.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
Second respondent filed a private complaint which was registered in PC No.20/2017. The private complaint was referred to police for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., After thorough investigation, the police filed charge sheet for the offence punishable under Section 323, 504 and 506 IPC as against one Ashok son of Shivachandra Agadi and dropped the case against the petitioner who was the second accused in the private complaint. The complainant did not challenge the final report and also the offences invoked by the police in the charge sheet and the matter went for trial as the accused Ashok did not plead guilty. When the matter stood thus, an application came to be filed by the prosecution on 30.07.2019 under Section 319 Cr.P.C., stating that the petitioner herein has also involved in cheating the complainant and therefore, he has to be arraigned as a second accused in the case. The learned Trial Magistrate issued show cause notice to the petitioner herein and petitioner herein filed detailed written objections as to how he is not a necessary accused person in the case on hand. The learned Trial Magistrate heard the parties in detail and passed an order rejecting the application filed on behalf of the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.P.C., by order dated 12.10.2020. The learned counsel for petitioner contended that “contended that ignoring the factual aspects, the learned Sessions Judge in the impugned order, allowed the application of the prosecution based on the contents of the application and the contents of the private complaint, which has resulted in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the petition.”
JUDGEMENT:
The bench held “The learned Sessions Judge did not bestow its attention to the charges that were framed by the Trial Court in pursuance of the charge sheet filed against Ashoka who is the first accused in the private complaint after thorough investigation. The Investigating agency did not find any material to invoke the offence under Section 420 IPC even though private complaint contents revealed that there was an element of cheating as against the petitioner is concerned. The contents of the application filed under Section 319 Cr.P.C., does not speak about the present petitioner for the charges that has been levelled ag ainst accused No.1 even though in the private complaint, few allegations are levelled against the petitioner which would attract the offence under Section 420 IPC.” Allowing the petition the bench said “Suffice to say, when the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is against the material facts on record, whereby the rights of the petitioner has been infringed warranting this Court to interfere with the said order by exercising jurisdiction under Sectio n 482 Cr.P.C.”
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY PRATIKSHYA P. BEURA
