20 April 2022 12:45 PM GMT
The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash a case registered by the police against an Advocate under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Information Technology Act, 2000, on a complaint filed by a Law Intern. A single judge bench of Justice V.Srishananda said, "Who is the aggressor party, what exactly that transpired are all subject matter of the investigation and...
The Karnataka High Court recently refused to quash a case registered by the police against an Advocate under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Information Technology Act, 2000, on a complaint filed by a Law Intern.
A single judge bench of Justice V.Srishananda said,
"Who is the aggressor party, what exactly that transpired are all subject matter of the investigation and after thorough investigation, police may file an appropriate report under section 173 Cr.P.C. Till such time, this Court cannot form any opinion by considering the material on record at this stage."
The petitioner Vasanth Adithya. J had approached the court seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against him under sections 324, 354, 341,506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
It was alleged by the complainant that she is working with Kreetam Law Associates as an intern. When she requested for a law intern certificate from the petitioner, there was a small altercation and exchange of few words and it is also alleged that a water bottle was thrown against her and she sustained injury on the right side of her chest and he also took out the mobile phone of the complainant and threw it away. Some obnoxious and objectionable messages were also sent to the mobile phone of the complainant. Based on the said complaint, police registered the case and are investigating the matter.
It was said that earlier to the filing of the present complaint by the complainant, the petitioner had also lodged a complaint with the police and no action had been taken against the same. He also contends that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen. A small incident has been blown out of proportion by the police in active collusion with the complainant and therefore sought for quashing of the complaint.
Prosecution opposed the plea
The matter is under investigation and if there is any truth in the incident, police will necessarily file final report or the police themselves may file 'B' final report in the incident and it is too premature for this Court to consider the prayer at this stage and sought for dismissal of the petition.
The court said, "The petitioner was called by the police and his statement has been recorded in respect of the incident. The police may consider the statements and file appropriate reports after investigation. Relief under section 482 Cr.P.C. as sought for by the petitioner at this stage cannot be granted."
The bench observed, "Firstly, the investigation is still under progress and police may file appropriate reports after thorough investigation. Secondly, expressing any opinion at this stage in respect of the merits of the matter, the rights of the parties would be put to jeopardy. Thirdly, no Court can stop an investigation in respect of a cognizable offence unless a particular person makes out a case that the very complaint is frivolous in nature and results in abuse of process of court."
Following which it said, "It is needless to emphasise that the police is required to consider the complaint averments made by the petitioner at the first instance and also take into consideration the explanation offered by the petitioner before the police when his statement came to be recorded."
Case Title: VASANTH ADITHYA. J v. STATE BY KARNATAKA
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3167/2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 127
Date of Order: 04TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022
Appearance: Advocate B. RAMESH for petitioner; Advocate K.RAHUL RAI for R1
Click Here To Read/Download Order