AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda, J.—Accused No. 1 to 3 are present.
When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for accused has filed a memo reading as under:
The Respondent/Accused respectfully submits as follows-
The Memo dated 24.10.2009 (Annexure ''E'' to the contempt petition) was filed by the Respondent/accused in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate without any malafide intentions; without any intention to abuse the process of the court and also not with any intention to cause obstructions in the court proceedings or protract the proceedings. The filing of the said memo was by mistake and inadvertence only.
Wherefore the Respondent/accused prays that this Hon''ble court may be pleased to discharge the Respondent/ accused, in the interest of justice.
The contempt petition was initiated against the accused on the ground that on 24.10.2009, the accused had filed a memo in P.C.R. No. 10453/2009 before the trial court, reading as hereunder:
The Accused No. 1 to 3 respectfully submits that they have filed Criminal Petition No. 4940/2009 before the Hon''ble High Court of Karnataka and Hon''ble High Court has passed the interim order of the crime No. 88/2009 pending PCR 10453/2009 before this Hon''ble Court. A certified copy of the order applied for has not be issued by the Hon''ble High Court and the same will be produced to this Hon''ble Court on the next date of hearing.
It is the grievance of the complainant that accused No. 1 to 3 by filing the aforestated memo have abused the process of court.
In order to appreciate this contention, it is necessary to briefly state the proceedings and the effect of memo filed by the accused on 24.10.2009.
The complainant herein had initiated a compliant alleging an offence punishable u/s 420 I.P.C. against accused No. 1 to 3 in PCR No. 10453/2009 before the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore. The learned CMM referred the complaint to the jurisdictional police in terms of Section 156(3) Code of Criminal Procedure The learned Magistrate granted bail to the accused on 22.08.2009. The final report was filed on 03.11.2009.
In our considered opinion, there was no need for the accused to appear before the court after they were released on bail till the final report was filed against them. Therefore, the memo filed on 24.10.2009 wherein, it is stated that this Court has passed an interim order in Crl.P 4940/2009 which was filed by the accused challenging the complaint registered against them had no bearing on the proceedings before the Court. The accused had not sought for stay of the proceedings or investigation by filing the memo dated 24.10.2009. As already stated, there was no need for the accused to appear before the trial court after they were released on bail till the final report was filed. This memo was filed before the final report was filed.
The accused in the memo filed today, have stated that they had neither intention to abuse the process of court nor intention to obstruct the judicial proceedings. The facts and circumstances of case and the proceedings stated supra, to some extent would justify the memo filed before this Court.
In view of the above discussion, the contempt proceedings are dropped.