LAWS(KAR)-2015-6-147

PRAKASH Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Decided On June 25, 2015
PRAKASH Appellant
V/S
The State Of Karnataka Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, in both the petitions before this Court, were lined up as prosecution witness in the special case No. 78/2008 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge, Belagavi. The prosecution lodged a case before the Lokayukta Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

(2.) IT is alleged that the petitioners have deposed falsely and thereby committed the offence under Section 193 of IPC. The District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi upon being convinced that the petitioner has committed the offence was pleased to lodge a complaint in accordance with the provisions of Section 340 of Cr.P.C. The Chief Administrative Officer, Belagavi by complaint dated 14.12.2011 was pleased to forward the complaint to the Court of Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Belagavi. The Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Belagavi, by its proceedings dated 18.01.2012 has been pleased to take cognizance and commenced trial of the parties. The petitioners are before this Court on a short point.

(3.) THE provisions of Section 344(1) states as under "take cognizance of the offence and may, after giving the offender a reasonable opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished for such offence......" He would also rely upon the judgment reported in : ILR 2011 KAR 1832. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the present stage is one for hearing before charge. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the provisions of Section 344 of Cr.P.C. has not been violated and the Court has only taken cognizance as is required under the provisions of the Act and has further issued summons. The ends of justice would be met if the Court below is directed to comply with the act under the provisions of Section 344 of Cr.P.C. Having taken cognizance, it is the bounden duty of the Court to afford an opportunity of showing cause as to why they should not be punished under the provisions of Section 344 of Cr.P.C.