Arun Kumar M.P. vs State of Karnataka

K.N. Phaneendra, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the first respondent-State and perused the records.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the entire proceedings in Crime No. 651/2013 on the file of the Civil Judge & JMFC, Srirangapatna, which is being investigated by Srirangapatna Police for the offence punishable under sections 379, 489A, 420 read with Section 511 of IPC and also u/s. 41(D) read with Section 102 of Cr.P.C.

The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously contended before this court that even if the entire allegations made in the FIR are considered, it does not disclose any cognizable offence against the petitioner. He further contends that the petitioner is a Politician and he is a former President of Mandya Municipal Corporation, Mandya and he has got very good status and reputation in the society. In order to tarnish his image, a false complaint is lodged arraying him as A5. It is also contended by the learned counsel that though the FIR was registered on 25.11.2013 till date the investigation has not been completed, no report has been submitted to the court. Therefore for all these reasons, he requests the court to quash the entire proceedings.

I have heard the arguments of the learned High Court Government Pleader who seeks some time to get the instructions from the concerned investigating officer.

On perusal of the complaint/FIR dated 25.11.2013 it reveals that the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srirangapatna Sub-Division, received a credible information at 7.30 p.m., that in Room No. 107 of Sachin Hotel situated at Srirangapatna Town, some persons by name Sri Shivaram S/o. Manchegowda of Ankegowdanakoppalu grama, Pandavapura Taluk along with some other persons are making arrangements to double the original currency notes with fake currency notes and in this context, he has been indulging in such activity in the said hotel. On receiving such information, the Deputy Superintendent of Police along with his staff, suddenly raided the said Hotel Room No. 107 and found the persons who were standing in front of the room, ran away from the said spot. The other five persons were inside the said room. Out of them, the petitioner was also one amongst them. They were talking with each other with regard to doubling the currency notes with fake currency notes. The Police also found a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs in the said room and none of the said persons who were present there gave proper explanation to the Police. There were two machines in the said room, one is used for ascertaining the fake currency notes and another is counting machine used for the purpose of counting the currency notes. It is also found by the Police that this petitioner was holding a revolver in his pant packet. The Police during the course of investigation have also seized cash of Rs. 25 lakhs, two machines, Esteem Car and Santro Car, 7 mobile handsets and a Point-22 Revolver. On the basis of the above said circumstances, the Police have suspected that there was commission of offence u/s. 379 of IPC and the said amount of Rs. 25 lakhs is said to have been used for doubling the currency notes with fake currency notes and thereby registered a case and started investigation.

Evidently, the person who was standing in front of the said room ran away from the spot with a bag in his hand. What are the contents in the said bag is not known and the person who ran away from the spot is not known and it is yet to be investigated to find out whether the said person was there for the purpose of exchanging currency notes with fake currency notes. At this stage, in my opinion, though FIR is not so exhaustive and is not giving meticulous details of the offence nevertheless broadly looking into the allegations made, some offence has been constituted. Therefore at this particular stage, the court cannot scuttle the investigation.

On perusal of the records, it is seen that though the FIR was registered on 25.11.2013, for more than a period of 10 to 11 months, the Police have not filed any report before the Court. It is the fundamental duty of the court to succinctly investigate the matter and submit appropriate report to the Court and they should not keep the hanging sword on the accused person. Further added to that, the learned counsel also submitted that he has got sufficient material with him to show that the said amount of Rs. 25 lakhs was his hard earned money and obtained it from one of the accused persons for the purpose of purchasing a site and the said amount was legally drawn from the banks and also by means of pledging the gold articles and therefore he has made all attempts to produce the same before Police, but the Police did not receive the same. The said arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner in my opinion, creates a serious doubt with regard to the investigation by the Police u/s. 41(A) of Cr.P.C.

The investigating officer in order to ascertain and remove the suspicion on the accused person, has to issue notice to the accused persons directing the said person against whom a reasonable complaint has been registered or credible information has been received or any reasonable suspicion exists against him that he has committed a cognizable offence to appear before the investigating officer and to give his explanation. When such notice is issued, then it is incumbent upon the accused person to appear before the Police Officer and to comply with the terms of the notice. When such person had complied with the notice, then the court can take appropriate action if he is not satisfied with the said compliance of the notice issued to him.

In this background, the statute itself provides an opportunity to the accused to appear before the investigating officer and to explain as to how he is not indulged in the alleged offence and what are his defences. It is to be borne in mind that the purpose of investigation is to un-earth the truth and to place it before the Court. For that purpose, it is the fundamental duty of the investigating officer to provide opportunity to both the parties and therefore, the accused persons in order to place all their materials before the Court, so that the investigating officer can formulate truthful report in order to submit the same before the Court.

In this particular case, as argued by the learned counsel, the investigating, officer is not at all receiving any materials produced by the accused. I hereby direct the learned High Court Government Pleader to appraise the sanctity of the investigation and also the purpose and object of investigation and also the provision of Section 41A of the investigating officer and direct him to provide opportunity to both the parties and investigate the matter in a proper manner and to file appropriate report before the Court within one month from the date of receipt of the order.

In number of cases, I have come across that the investigating officers after registration of the cases have not been investigating the matter for a long time even without giving any explanation or taking permission from the court. Therefore I feel, it is just and necessary to send a copy of this order to the Director General of Police, in order to ascertain as to in how many cases, the investigations are lethargically done without any reasons and also to take appropriate severe action and see that appropriate and proper report are submitted to the Court in order to proceed with the criminal matters.

In view of my above said observations, in my opinion, though ordeal some allegations are made in the FIR, this Court relying upon some other extraneous documentary evidence produced, cannot quash the entire proceedings at the threshold preventing Police from investigation. Therefore I do not find any strong reasons to consider the petition. Hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Registry is hereby directed to send a copy of this order to the Director General of Police and concerned Police Officers/Deputy Superintendent of Police, Srirangapatna for future guidance and appropriate swift action.