SHIVAKUMARA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Accused Nos. 3 to 7 in Crime No. 276/2013 registered by Hosadurga Police Station within the jurisdiction of Prl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Hosadurga, Chitradurga District, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 149 of IPC have come up in this petition seeking quashing of proceedings initiated pursuant to the said complaint. The offence alleged against them is with reference to issuance of false death certificate in respect of 2nd respondent herein - Smt. S. Bhagyamma, who is said to be owner of 05 Acres 35 guntas of land in Sy. No. 61 (old Sy. No. 15) situated at Rangavvanahally Village, Madadakere Hobli, Hosadurga Taluk. The allegation against petitioners herein is that they assisted accused Nos. 1 and 2 to create death certificate of 2nd respondent and with the help of same in securing the order in O.S. No. 169/2010 and Crl. Misc. No. 73/2009 for transfer of khata of the said property in favour of accused Nos. 1 and 2 and also in assisting them to secure the order of declaration that they are the owners of the aforesaid land pursuant to unregistered sale deed dated 21.11.2010 said to have created by accused Nos. 1 and 2 with reference to the property of 2nd respondent.

(2.) Admittedly, JMFC, Hosadurga, has ordered for investigation into the matter. Chargesheet is yet to be filed. Even before the chargesheet is filed, accused Nos. 3 to 7, who are working as Village Accountants/Revenue Inspectors, have come up in this proceeding seeking quashing of the proceedings in Crime No. 276/2013 of Hosadurga Police Station on the ground that prior sanction is not secured by the prosecution before filing the complaint. Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable and the same is required to be dismissed. In support of the same, learned counsel for petitioners relied upon an unreported judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Anil Kumar and Others Vs. M.K. Aiyappa and Another in Crl. Appeal Nos. 1590-1591 of 2013 and the relevant portion of the judgment relied upon by learned counsel is at paragraph No. 14 and the same reads as under:-

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for petitioners. Perused the judgment referred to supra. On going through the same, it is clearly seen that such sanction is required only when the act committed by petitioners is in good faith in the course of their employment. In the instant case, the material available on record would disclose that there is prima facie case for investigation to ascertain the involvement of accused Nos. 1 and 2 with accused Nos. 3 to 7 in creation of death certificate of 2nd respondent and also in assisting accused Nos. 1 and 2 in securing decree in O.S. No. 169/2010 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Hosadurga, as also the order in Crl. Mis. No. 73/2009 on the file of Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Hosadurga. In that view of the matter, the aforesaid judgment would not enure to the benefit of petitioners herein and that the material available on record would demonstrate that there is a triable offence alleged against petitioners - accused Nos. 3 to 7. Hence, petition filed by them seeking quashing of proceedings is premature and the same is required to be dismissed.