1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF

GULBARGA BENCH

DATED THIS THE 10 TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2014

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SREENIVASE GOWDA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.15346/2011

Between:

Basagondappa S/o Shivappa Matali Age: 71 years, Occ: Pensioner R/o MIG-39, Jalanagar, … Petitioner

(By Sri Basagondappa S. Matali, Party-in-Person)

And:

1. The State of Karnataka Represented by Addl. State Public Prosecutor High Court, Circuit Bench, Gulbarga

2. B.R.Patil (Lingadalli) Age: 77 years, Occ: Advocate Vice-President, BLDEA, Chairman BLDEA, Governing Body Solapur Road, Bijapur

3. M.B.Patil Age: 40 years Occ: M.P., General Secretary BLDEA, Akkamahadevi Road 2

Bijapur

4. B.S.Patil (Kumate) Disputed President (Expired) Vice President, BLDEA, Association Bijapur, Road, Bijapur

5. S.S.Savalgi (Expired) Age: Major, Occ: Business Vice President, B.L.D.E. Association Bijapur, Jorapur Peth, Bijapur

6. M.A.Patil, Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture Director of Governing Body Member BLDEA Association, Bijapur R/o Bijapur, Tq. Bijapur

7. K.D.Patil (), Ex. MLA Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture Director, B.L.D.E. Association Bijapur, Shahapet Galli, Bijapur

8. S.H.Lagali, Advocate, Director B.L.D.E.A. Bijapur Uppali Burj Road, Bijapur

9. S.V.Hakkappakki Age: Major, Occ: Business Director, B.L.D.E.A., Bijapur Indi Road, Bijapur

10.G.K.Patil () Age: Major, Occ: Director & Treasurer, B.L.D.E.A., R/o Tikota, Tq. Bijapur

11.V.N.Patil (Narasalagi) Age: Major, Occ: Service & Director B.L.D.E.A., Bijapur, KHB Colony 3

Solapur Road, Bijapur

12.B.B.Patil (Chananur) Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture Director, BLDEA, R/o Chabanur Tq. Muddebihal

13.M.K.Patil (Kakhandaki) Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture R/o Kakhandaki, Tq. Bijapur

14.B.A.Patil (Halagunaki) Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture Director, BLDEA, R/o Halagunaki Tq. Indi, Dist. Bijapur

15.N.G.Shivagond Age: Major, Occ: Service B.L.D.E.A., Solapur Road Bijapur … Respondents

(By Sri Sanjay A. Patil, Addl. SPP for R1; R2, R3, R8-R15 are served; R4 to R7 are no more)

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying to quash the order dated 15.01.2010 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Bijapur, in Criminal Revision Petition No.47/2005 and as well as the order dated 17.03.2005 passed by JMFC 1 st Court, Bijapur in P.C.No.55/1999 wherein dismissed the complaint filed by petitioner against accused Nos.1 to 14 (R2 to R15), and pass an order of issuing the summons to the accused Nos.1 to 14 (R2-R15) in P.C.No.55/2009.

This petition coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following: 4

O R D E R

The petitioner who is party-in-person is called out and he is absent.

2. I have gone through the petition and the orders passed by the Courts below including the records and I have heard Sri Sanjay A. Patil, learned Additional State

Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.

3. The petitioner has preferred this petition challenging the orders passed by the Courts below.

4. The facts leading to this petition are:

Petitioner filed a private complaint under Section

200 of Cr.P.C. before the jurisdictional Magistrate praying to take cognizance of the offences alleged in the complaint against the respondents. It appears, the jurisdictional Magistrate after registering the private complaint directed the Police to investigate the complaint as contemplated under Section 156(3) of 5

Cr.P.C. The Police after investigating the complaint had filed ‘B’ report and it was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing a protest memo and it was rejected and ‘B’ report submitted by the Police was accepted.

Thereafter, he challenged the said order of the

Magistrate before the Sessions Court in a criminal revision petition and it was also dismissed against which, the petitioner has preferred this criminal petition.

5. The Police, while conducting investigation pursuant to the direction issued to them by the jurisdictional Magistrate on the private complaint filed by the petitioner, called upon the petitioner to produce certain documents, which he has failed to do so.

However, the Police after holding investigation with the available material have filed ‘B’ report to the jurisdictional Magistrate. The jurisdictional Magistrate before accepting the ‘B’ report has issued summons to 6

the petitioner calling upon him to show cause as to why the ‘B’ report submitted by the Police should not be accepted. Pursuant to which the petitioner had appeared before the learned Magistrate and opposed acceptance of ‘B’ report by way of filing a protest memo.

Hence, the Court recorded sworn statement of the petitioner and found that it has no relevance with the allegations made in the complaint. Under the above circumstances, the learned Magistrate has rejected the protest memo filed by the petitioner and accepted the ‘B’ report submitted by the Police and closed the proceedings.

6. The petitioner aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Magistrate has preferred a criminal revision petition before the jurisdictional Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Judge after reconsidering the entire matter once again dismissed the revision petition and confirmed the order passed by the learned Magistrate. 7

7. I have carefully gone through both the orders and I do not find any illegality or infirmity warranting my interference.

8. Hence, the petition is dismissed as devoid of merit.

Sd/- JUDGE

NB*