K.T. NAVEEN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sec. 482 of Cr.P.C, praying this Court to set aside the order dtd. 8/2/2021 passed in C.C.No.19618/2018 on the file of XXXI ACMM, Bengaluru (earlier V ACMM, Bengaluru), or allow the application filed under Sec. 323 of Cr.P.C., or alternatively direct the learned Magistrate to decide on the application filed by the petitioner-accused No.1 under Sec. 323 of Cr.P.C., or pass such other and further relifes as this Court deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that the police have investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable under Ss. 120B read with Sec. 37 of IPC Sec .3 read with Ss. 25(1)(a) and 25(1B)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959. Based on the charge sheet material, the Trial Court has framed the charge against the petitioner for the above offences. The petitioner herein has filed an application under Sec. 323 of Cr.P.C., praying the Court to commit the above case to the Court of summons contending that Sec. 120B is invoked against the petitioner herein, which clearly says that, whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence. It is also urged before the Trial Court that the Schedule 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure specifically mentions that under the aforementioned sec. criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards is triable by the Court, which abetment of the offence, which is the object of conspiracy if triable. Hence, the matter has to be committed to the Sessions Court. The said application is opposed by the prosecution contending that the offences under Sec. 302 of IPC is not invoked and also no such offence is taken place and only an allegation of conspiracy is alleged against the petitioner. Under the circumstances, no need to commit the matter to the Sessions Court. The Trial Court having considered the grounds urged in the petition and also the oral objection raised by the Senior APP comes to the conclusion that as on today, the witnesses examined have not spoken about the ingredients of Sec. 120B or Sec. 302 of IPC. So, until the examination of the material witnesses, it is appropriate to keep the application in abeyance and further observed that at this stage, an application appears to be pre-matured. Therefore, ordered to keep the application in abeyance. Hence, the present petition is filed before this Court challenging the order passed by the Trial Court.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in his arguments, he reiterated the grounds urged before the Trial Court and further contends that the offence under Sec. 120B of IPC is triable by that Court by which abetment of the offence which is the object of the conspiracy is triable. The schedule also makes it clear that abetment of an offence is triable by the Court which is empowered to try the offence abetted. Therefore, the offence of Sec. 302 is triable by the Court of Sessions; the case in hand ought to be committed thereto.