PRAKASHAYYA ANDANAYYA CHARANTIMATH Vs. STATE OF KARNATEKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second respondent filed a suit in OS No. 229 of 2014 against the petitioners for the relief of permanent injunction and thereafter he filed a private complaint under sec. 200 of Cr.P.C alleging that the petitioners who are the members of Shri Bhadraswami Hindulida Vagadavar Shikshana Samsthe have misappropriated the funds received from the Government.

(2.) The learned Magistrate referred the matter to the police for investigation under sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The police after investigation filed B report before the learned Magistrate. The second respondent filed protest petition to the B report submitted by the police. The learned Magistrate by order dtd. 7/10/2021 rejected the B report filed by the police and further took cognizance of the offence punishable under Sec. 418, 420, 465, 468 of IPC against the Petitioners. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate rejecting B report without assigning any reason is not a speaking order and further rejecting B report as well as taking cognizance simultaneously is not permissible in law. In support, he places reliance on the decision of co-ordinate bench of this court in the case of Dr.Ravikumar V/s. Mrs. KMC Vasantha and another reported in ILR 2018 Kar 1725.