H. SUNIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the order dtd. 14/12/2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge referring the private complaint in PCR No.65 of 2018 for investigation registered by the 2nd respondent/complainant for offences punishable under Ss. 420, 408, 409, 504, 506 read with 34 of the IPC and under Sec. 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(2.) Heard Sri Sandesh J.Chouta, learned Senior counsel along with Sri Naveed Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Namitha Mahesh, B.G. learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and Sri Amruthesh N.P., learned counsel for respondent No.2.

(3.) The petitioner is a practicing Advocate, at Bangalore. The petitioner represents a client by name Shankarnarayan who the petitioner claims to be his close friend as well. The client of the petitioner and the complainant/respondent No.2 are husband and wife. Certain instances appear to have happened between the husband and the wife which led to several proceedings against each other. The petitioner in the episode is the Advocate representing the husband in all the cases. The relationship between the complainant and her husband is not required to be considered in the case at hand, as the present lis is not the one between the complainant and the husband, it is between the wife - complainant and the husband's Advocate- the petitioner.