H.Narayanaswamy vs Krishnappa

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondent-complainant.

The prayer is sought for quashing the order passed by the 5^th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District at Devanahalli in Crl.R.P.No.15015/2019, wherein the Revisional Court set aside the order taking cognizance and issuing summons against the respondent. Being aggrieved by the same, the complainant has approached this Court.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the Revisional Court has committed an error in reversing the order of Trial Court only on the ground that there is a civil dispute between the parties and the very approach is not correct. However, it is noticed by this Court that when the private complaint is filed, the same is not supported by an affidavit as held in the judgment of the Apex Court in Priyanka Srivastavas’s case. Even on perusal of averments of the complaint also, there is no compliance under Sections 154(1) and 154(3). Even though, case of the petitioner is that twice he had approached the police and police did not register the case, but the petitioner did not approach the superiors. When such being the case, there is no compliance under Sections 154(1) and 154(3). When there is a foundational defect in filing the private complaint and the same is not supported by an affidavit and no compliance under Sections 154(1) and 154(3), there cannot be any criminal prosecution against the petitioner.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the said defect can be cured. But the same can be cured only before passing any substantive order by the learned Magistrate and here in the case on hand, already substantive order has been passed and cognizance has been taken and proceeded to consider the matter against the respondent-accused. Hence, the said submission also cannot be accepted.

Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed.