K VENKATESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners. Perused the records.

(2.) THE Respondents Bangalore Metropolitan Task Force (BMTF) has registered a case in Crime No.27/2012 against these petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 217 of IPC investigated the matter and submitted the charge -sheet for the offence punishable under Section 217 of IPC and also under Section 321 (B) of Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short 'the KMC Act'). The brief factual matrix that emanate from the records are that the Police Sub - Inspector of BMTF, Bangalore, submitted a report to the Court of CMM, Bangalore, stating that on 21.9.2011 the complainant by name Smt. Sunitha Rishi a resident of Block 'A' Ethar Apartment, No.10 Sarakki Main Road, J.P. Nagar, Bangalore, lodged a complaint before the BMTF stating that the owner of Flat No.563 situated adjacent to the property of the complainant was carrying on construction in violation of the approved plan issued by the BBMP, and also in utter violation of the Rules and also without following the procedure without leaving any set back they are constructing the building in the said property. The said complaint was received and registered in No.SP/BMTF/PC/63/2011 - 2012 and thereafter they sent a Project Asst. Director by name B.V. Radha who inspected the spot and submitted the report. Thereafter a direction was issued to the Asst. Engineer of KMC. As no action was taken the case was investigated and charge -sheet was filed for the above said offence.

(3.) THE learned counsel strenuously contends that the Trial Court without looking into the material on record and without discussing with regard to the jurisdiction of the BMTF in investigating and filing the charge -sheet has mechanically taken cognizance and issued process against the petitioners. Therefore, the said proceedings are sought to be set aside. Though the wordings in the prayer column in the petition indicate that the orders passed by the learned Magistrate in C.C.No.17368/2013 dated 30.7.2012 requires to be set aside but virtually the body of the petition discloses that the petitioner has sought for quashing of the entire proceedings.