INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE EARNEST IMMANUEL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY SUB. INSPECTOR AND LAKSHMAMMA W/O VEERANNA, MADAMAGIRI S/O VEERANNA, MADESH S/O VEERANNA, SUBRAMANYAN S/O VEERANNA, OWNER AND OPERATOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Petitioner's counsel and also learned Government Pleader for the 1st Respondent State in respect of the Petitioner calling in question the order passed by the trial court accepting the 'B' report.

(2.) SUBMISSION of the Petitioner's counsel is that, the Petitioner which is a social organization had filed a protest petition before the trial court following 'B' report submitted by the police and the background facts are that the Tahsildar of Kunigal lodged a complaint with the P.S.I, Kunigal to the effect that accused Nos. 1 to 4 of Hutridurga village were extracting work from Chinnaraju, Kamalamma and their three children and one Madesha, Eramma and their two children and one Nagarashna and Rajagopal as bonded labourers and therefore action was sought to be taken against the accused persons. The said complaint by the Tahsildar was preceded by a report submitted by the Asst. Commissioner to the Tahsildar. The police however, after investigation, submitted a 'B' report and this was called in question by the Petitioner by filing the protest petition. The court below accepted the 'B' report and rejected the protest petition. It is this order which is now called in question.

(3.) SUBMISSION of the learned Government Pleader for the State is that the court below accepted the 'B' report and therefore nothing remains and apart from that, the 'B' report was accepted earlier but due to some technical reasons, the court thought it fit to once again examine the witnesses and thereafter the impugned order was passed. As such, no interference is called for.