JAYAPPA ALMS JAYADEV Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the arguments of petitioner's Counsel and the HCGP for respondent-State.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that on 27-9-2012, there was a procession for immersion of Lord Ganesh idol and the police officials who were on duty, instructed to go in other street, advising them that there are chances of communal clashes if they proceed in that way. At that time the accused persons did not heed to the advise and also abused them in a filthy language and caused threat to the life and prevented the complainant and others in discharging their duties of public servant and this petitioner and others have pelted stones against the public servants and hence a complaint was given by the Police Sub-Inspector, Rattihalli. Based on the complaint, the police have registered a case for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 332, 353, 504 and 506 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention of Damage of Public Property Act, 1984.

(3.) This petitioner, who is accused 9 in his petition he contends that he has been falsely implicated in the case. He hails from respectable family and having good reputation in the society and he is a practicing Advocate, resident of Rattihalli town and he is always defending his clients against the crimes registered by the Rattihalli police. As such, the respondent-police have falsely implicated the petitioner by slapping false and fictitious charges against the petitioner and he has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further contended that the charge-sheet has been filed only against 46 persons out of the said 1,500 persons who gathered in the procession of immersion of Lord Ganesha is highly unbelievable and it is highly impossible to believe the overt acts mentioned by the respondent-police ana all the eye-witnesses and other witnesses are police staff except C.W.S. 2 and 3, who are the pancha witnesses and hence this petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the charge-sheet and hence it is nothing but an abuse of process implicating the petitioner as one of the accused and hence prayed this Court to quash the proceedings.