Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Gangadhar Narayan Nayak and Nagaraj Ganapati Naik, were accused Nos. 1 and 2 in Special Case No. 25/2018 pending before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, U.K. Karwar, for an alleged offence under Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. They filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the order dated 19.04.2018 taking cognizance of the offence and the entire criminal proceedings. The petitioners argued that the cognizance order was invalid because no sanction had been obtained as required under Section 23 of the POCSO Act. The court examined the provision and found that Section 23 of the POCSO Act mandates that no court shall take cognizance of an offence under that section except upon a complaint made by or with the previous sanction of the appropriate authority. Since the record did not show any such sanction, the court held that the cognizance order was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. The court allowed the petition, quashed the cognizance order dated 19.04.2018, and dismissed the entire criminal proceedings against the petitioners.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of Proceedings - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Inherent Powers - Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of order dated 19.04.2018 taking cognizance of offence under Section 23 of POCSO Act - Court held that cognizance without sanction is invalid and proceedings are liable to be quashed (Paras 1-10).
B) POCSO Act - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 23 POCSO Act - Requirement of Sanction - Offence under Section 23 of POCSO Act requires sanction for prosecution - In absence of sanction, cognizance order is bad in law - Held that proceedings are quashed (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order taking cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the POCSO Act is sustainable in the absence of sanction as required under the said provision.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The order dated 19.04.2018 taking cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the POCSO Act in Special Case No.25/2018 pending on the file of Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, U.K. Karwar is quashed. Consequently, the entire criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners are quashed.
Law Points
- Section 482 Cr.P.C. inherent powers
- Section 23 POCSO Act sanction requirement
- cognizance without sanction invalid
- quashing of criminal proceedings
Case Details
2021 LawText (KAR) (09) 40
Criminal Petition No.101420/2020
S.P. Kandagal for petitioners, Praveen K. Uppar for respondent 1
Gangadhar Narayan Nayak @ Gangadhar Hi Regutti and Nagaraj Ganapati Naik @ Nagaraj Malkod
The State of Karnataka and Smt. Manjula Ishwar Naik
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of cognizance order and criminal proceedings for offence under Section 23 POCSO Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought quashing of order dated 19.04.2018 taking cognizance of offence under Section 23 POCSO Act and entire criminal proceedings in Special Case No.25/2018.
Filing Reason
Petitioners were accused of publishing identity of victim in violation of Section 23 POCSO Act, but cognizance was taken without required sanction.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 19.04.2018 taking cognizance of offence under Section 23 POCSO Act in Special Case No.25/2018 by Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, U.K. Karwar.
Issues
Whether the order taking cognizance of offence under Section 23 POCSO Act is sustainable without sanction as required under the provision.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that cognizance order is invalid as no sanction was obtained under Section 23 POCSO Act.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 23 of the POCSO Act requires previous sanction for taking cognizance of an offence under that section. In the absence of such sanction, the cognizance order is without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and sought quashing the order dated 19.04.2018 taking cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Section 23 of the POCSO Act mandates that no court shall take cognizance of an offence under that section except upon a complaint made by or with the previous sanction of the appropriate authority.
Procedural History
The petitioners were accused in Special Case No.25/2018 for offence under Section 23 POCSO Act. The trial court took cognizance on 19.04.2018. Petitioners filed Criminal Petition No.101420/2020 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the High Court seeking quashing. The petition was heard and reserved for orders on 24.09.2021 and pronounced on 17.09.2021.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 482
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: Section 23
