Full Judgment Text
NONREPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.15911592 OF 2018
(Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) Nos. 65056506 of 2018)
Joshine Antony ….Appellant(s)
VERSUS
M/s Barafwala Cold Storage &
Agro Processor & Ors. ….Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals are filed against the final
judgment and order dated 28.06.2018 passed by
Signature Not Verified
the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at
Digitally signed by
ANITA MALHOTRA
Date: 2018.12.11
17:50:51 IST
Reason:
1
Dharwad in W.P.Nos. 102964 and 102965 of 2018
whereby the High Court disposed of the writ
petitions with certain observations detrimental to
the appellant’s complaint in FIR No.45/2018, Mal
Maruti Police Station, Belagavi.
3. The proceedings out of which these appeals
arise have emanated on the strength of FIR No.
45/2018 registered at Mal Maruti Police Station,
Belagavi.
4. It is in relation to commission of certain
offences punishable under the provisions of the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and the
Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle
Preservation Act, 1964 against respondent No. 1. It
is now pending for its final disposal in the Court of
JMFC II, Belagavi.
5. The aforementioned proceedings were
challenged by respondent No. 1 in the High Court of
2
Karnataka (Dharwad Bench) by filing the writ
petitions. The High Court, by impugned order,
disposed of the writ petitions with certain
observations giving rise to filing of the present
appeals by way of special leave by the complainant
in this Court.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the
parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we
are inclined to dispose of these appeals with an
observation that the Investigating Officer (IO) of the
case and the concerned Magistrate, who is trying
the case will not be influenced by any observations
made by the High Court while making and
completing the investigation and trying the case on
merits.
7. In other words, the IO and Magistrate
concerned would proceed in the matter strictly in
accordance with law on the basis of evidence and
3
would not be influenced, in any manner, by the
observations made by the High Court in the
impugned order.
8. We have, however, refrained ourselves from
going into the merits of the case at this stage in
these appeals because we find that the IO and
Magistrate are already seized of the matter.
9. With these observations, the appeals stand
disposed of. We, however, direct the concerned
Magistrate to finally dispose of the matter within a
period of six months from the date of this order.
………...................................J.
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]
…...……..................................J.
[INDU MALHOTRA]
New Delhi;
December 11, 2018
4