Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

KAHC010168012022_1

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-08-05 23:29:38
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Magistrate's order directing further investigation and the 'B' report are liable to be quashed, and whether the investigation should be handed over to the CBI

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (KAR) (09) 48

WRIT PETITION No.7784 OF 2022 (GM-RES)

2022-09-03

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

Hashmath Pasha, Nasir Ali, Dhyan Chinnappa, K.P. Yashodha, P. Prasanna Kumar, S. Mahesh, Pelikal K. Arjun

Smt. M. Manjula, Mr. Rohith

State of Karnataka, Commissioner of Police Bengaluru City, Dr. S.D. Sharanappa, Ningappa B. Sakari, R. Prakash, SHO HAL Police Station, SHO Halasurgate Police Station, Senior Sub-Registrar Gandhinagar, Central Bureau of Investigation, D.A. Srinivas, Damodar, Ramachandraiah, K. Prathap, Smt. D.A. Kalpaja

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

The writ petition challenges orders passed by a Metropolitan Magistrate directing further investigation in a murder case, and seeks transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation.

Remedy Sought

The petitioners seek quashing of the Magistrate's orders dated 21-02-2022 and 10-03-2022, rejection of the 'B' report, and a direction to hand over the investigation to the CBI.

Filing Reason

The petitioners allege that the investigation conducted by the Special Investigation Team was faulty, unfair, and ineffective, and that the 'B' report was improperly filed.

Previous Decisions

Earlier, a writ petition (WP No.4333/2021) was filed seeking investigation, and the High Court directed constitution of a Special Investigation Team. The SIT filed a 'B' report, which the Magistrate rejected and directed further investigation by a different officer. The petitioners now challenge that order.

Issues

Whether the Magistrate's order directing further investigation can be sustained? Whether the 'B' report should be rejected? Whether the investigation should be transferred to the CBI?

Judgment Excerpts

K.Raghunath during his life time is claimed to have owned many immovable properties in different places in the District of Bangalore the 2nd petitioner/son... enters the guest house and sees his father hanging to a ceiling fan

Procedural History

On 02-05-2019, K. Raghunath left home to meet private respondents. On 04-05-2019, he was found hanging; UDR No.28/2019 was registered and closed as suicide. On 15-02-2020, petitioner No.1 filed a complaint alleging murder; police refused to register. On 24-02-2020, a private complaint was filed under Section 200 CrPC (PCR No.51691/2020). On 02-03-2020, the Magistrate ordered investigation, leading to FIR No.89/2020. Two other FIRs (148/2020 and 7/2021) were registered. Petitioners filed W.P.No.4333/2021, and the High Court directed constitution of an SIT. After investigation, the SIT filed a 'B' report. The Magistrate rejected the 'B' report on 21-02-2022 and 10-03-2022 and directed further investigation by a different IO. Hence, the present writ petition challenging those orders and seeking CBI investigation.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 200, 482
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 34, 120B, 201, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 302, 420, 421, 464, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474, 477
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
Writ Petition Further Investigation CBI Investigation B Report Murder Suicide Special Investigation Team SIT Magistrate CrPC Section 200 Private Complaint UDR Property Dispute Will Suspicious Death

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court KAHC010168012022_1 2026-08-05 23:29:38
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Considers Second Appeal in Eviction Suit Where Title Was Disputed; Maintainability of Suit for Possession Without Declaration of Title at Issue. Court Frames Substantial Questions on Effect of Rent Controller's Finding and Evidentia... 2026-08-05 23:29:37
Categories
Popular Tags
Writ petition acquittal natural justice murder compensation burden of proof limitation Benefit of doubt Article 226 circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.5184 OF 2026

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Against School Tribunal's Denial of Reinstatement t...

Supreme Court Disposes Appeal by Consent Appointing Arbitrator in MSME Dispute, Leaving Le...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals Against Madras High Court’s Setting Aside of Alienations and...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals on Permanent Establishment of Formula One World Championship L...

Supreme Court Interprets Scope of 'Child' under POCSO Act in Appeal Concerning Mentally Ch...

Supreme Court Hears Appeals Against High Court Decrees in Malankara Church Disputes. Rival...

Lost Your Password?