NARAYANAMMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner/CW.2 challenging the order passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-1, Bengaluru in S.C.No.1056/2009 discharging the accused from Section 436 of IPC and transferring the case to IX ACMM, Bengaluru for trial.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel for respondents/accused Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6.

(3.) It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the material placed on record clearly indicate the fact that the provision of Section 436 of IPC are attracted, since the vehicle Toyota Qualis bearing registration No.KA-05-MB-2613, which was kept outside the house, was set on fire and the car was completely burnt due to the act of the accused. The trial court, without considering the material in its right perspective, has came to a wrong conclusion that the provision of Section 436 are attracted and sent back the file to the ACMM Court for trial of the remaining offences, as the said offences are triable by the said Court. Further it is submitted that a mahazar was also drawn immediately after the alleged incident and even, a complaint was also registered in this behalf. He further submits that there are eye-witnesses to the alleged incident. Under the said facts and circumstance, the Court below, without application of mind, has passed the impugned order which has resulted in miscarriage of justice. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petition and to set-aside the order dated 09.04.2012.