Karnataka HC Refuses To Quash Proceedings Against Police Officer Who Tore Court Order & Abused Judge
The Karnataka High Court refused to quash the proceedings against the police officer who defamed, tore and threw the Court’s Order, and abused the Session Judge who granted anticipatory bail in filthy language.
The Accused Police Officer filed the present petition for quashing the order of cognizance taken by a Magistrate under Sections 166A, 340, 350, 499 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code for his acts.
The Bench of Justice K Natarajan observed, “11. The petitioner being a police officer, has defamed the Court order, torn the Court order and thrown the same on the floor and abused the Sessions Judge who granted anticipatory bail in filthy language. Such a police officer shall be tried and punished in accordance with law and even the police department should have taken action against him by conducting departmental enquiry for doing such type of activities by him. Such a person like petitioner who is no respect of law cannot be shown any sympathy by the court and it is not a fit case for quashing the Criminal proceedings against him.”
Advocate VF Kumbar appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Chetan Jadhav appeared for the Respondent.
After defaming the judicial honour and judicial officer, the police officer took the complainant to another police station and threatened the complainant that he would encounter him and make the complainant a rowdy sheeter by fixing false cases. The Officer also showed the revolver on the head of the complainant and threatened to encounter in the presence of his wife and bury the body.
Furtherance to the acts of the Police Officer, a Magistrate, after receipt of the complaint, took cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Section 166A, 340, 350, 499, 506 of IPC and Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act and issued summons to the petitioner, which is under challenge.
The Court observed, “Therefore I am of the view that the petitioner is required to go for trial whatever the defence available regarding seizing of the weapon by Suryanagar police and the investigation officer is some other person than him were all disputed fact which is matter of trial.”
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition.
Cause Title: Sri Harish V v. Sri Narayanaswamy @JCB Narayan
Appearances:
Petitioner: Advocate VF Kumbar
Respondents: Advocate Chetan Jadhav
