Facts
The petitioners were accused in Crime No. 86/2022, registered by Indiranagar Police Station for offences under Sections 506 read with 34, 504, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), arising from an incident on 24 April 2022.
Source reference: p. 3A counter-case, Crime No. 85/2022, was also registered in connection with the same incident against respondent No. 6 and her family.
Source reference: p. 3The petitioners sought to quash Crime No. 86/2022 and to have investigation of Crime No. 85/2022 transferred to higher authorities for a fair investigation.
Source reference: pp. 3–4Issues
Whether the proceedings in Crime No. 86/2022 should be quashed as an abuse of process, given that a counter-case arose from the same incident
Source reference: pp. 3–4Whether investigation of Crime No. 85/2022 should be transferred to higher authorities for fair investigation
Source reference: p. 4Law Applied
The petition invoked Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), seeking quashing of criminal proceedings and other relief.
Source reference: p. 2For cases and counter-cases arising from the same incident, the Full Bench decision in State of Karnataka, by Circle Inspector of Police v. Hoskeri Ningappa, ILR 2012 KAR 509, requires investigation by the same investigating officer, prosecution by different Public Prosecutors, and trial before the same court.
Source reference: pp. 4–6The evidence and arguments in each case are to be dealt with in sequence, with judgments reserved and then pronounced by the same judge simultaneously, one after the other.
Source reference: pp. 4–6Reasoning
The Court noted that both crimes arose from the same incident and held that the investigation agency was required to follow the procedure laid down in Hoskeri Ningappa.
Source reference: pp. 4, 6It directed that appropriate reports be filed if investigation in both cases had been completed, and left the parties at liberty to seek appropriate directions from the jurisdictional Magistrate to ensure compliance with the prescribed procedure.
Source reference: p. 6The Court did not separately determine the merits of the quashing or transfer requests.
Source reference: no citationHolding
The Court dismissed the writ petition.
It directed the investigation agency to adhere to the Hoskeri Ningappa guidelines in the case and counter-case, and permitted the parties to seek necessary directions from the jurisdictional Magistrate.
Source reference: p. 6Acts & Sections Cited
7 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731
Indian Penal Code, 18606
Original Court PDF
MRS NEETA RAJENDRANvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
