Case Note & Summary
The appeal under Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) arose from the dismissal of an application filed under Section 195-A Cr.P.C. by a prosecution witness (CW-19) in a murder trial. The witness, who was the appellant, alleged that respondent Nos. 2 to 4, including an ex-minister and two police officers, threatened him to give false evidence in favor of the accused. He sought registration of a complaint and investigation. The trial court in S.C. No. 50/2017 dismissed the application on 9 January 2019, leading to this appeal. The appellant contended that the police conducted a sham investigation and that respondents 3 and 4, in collusion with respondent 2, tampered with witnesses. He highlighted that despite making representations to various authorities, no action was taken, and he filed a writ petition in the High Court seeking transfer of investigation to the CBI, which was pending. The appellant argued before the trial court that the accused brought huge crowds to court creating a fearful environment, and he submitted a memo with photographs and videos, but the court did not act. His counsel argued that the rejection violated his right under Article 21 and that the court below failed to consider the legal position under Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. Section 195 bars courts from taking cognizance of certain offences except on complaint by the court, and Section 340 provides the mechanism. The appellant contended that the trial court's order was illegal and not sustainable. The High Court heard the matter and reserved judgment, but the full judgment text provided does not include the final decision, analysis, or directions; therefore, the outcome of the appeal is not known.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Witness Protection - Application under Section 195-A Cr.P.C. alleging threats to witnesses - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 195, 195-A, 340, 341; Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 193-196, 199, 200, 205-211 - Appellant, a witness in a murder trial, filed application alleging threats by police officers and an ex-minister to give false evidence and sought registration of complaint and investigation - Trial court dismissed application without holding enquiry - On appeal, the High Court examined whether the dismissal was proper in light of the legal framework requiring a complaint by the court under Section 195(1)(b) for certain offences and the procedure under Section 340 Cr.P.C. (Paras 3-10).
B) Criminal Procedure - Cognizance of Offences - Requirement of court complaint under Section 195(1)(b) - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 195, 340 - Offences under Sections 193-196 IPC allegedly committed in relation to court proceedings require complaint in writing by that court under Section 340 - Trial court failed to consider this mandatory mechanism while dismissing application - Appeal raised the issue whether the court below committed an error by not applying the principle that no court shall take cognizance of such offences except on complaint by the court concerned (Paras 8-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in dismissing the application under Section 195-A Cr.P.C. without conducting an inquiry into allegations of threats to a witness in a pending murder trial.
Law Points
- Section 195 Cr.P.C. bars cognizance of specified offences without complaint by court
- Section 340 Cr.P.C. provides procedure for making such complaint
- Section 195-A Cr.P.C. deals with threat to induce false evidence
- witnesses have right to protection under Article 21
- trial court must consider legal provisions while deciding application under Section 195-A Cr.P.C.
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (03) 34
Criminal Appeal No. 100046/2019
Sri. M.B. Naragund, Senior Counsel for Sri. Deepak S Shetty (Appellant); Sri. A.S. Ponnanna, Additional Advocate General and Sri. Praveen K Uppar, High Court Government Pleader for R1; Sri. Raja Venkatappa Naik, Advocate for R5 to R10
Gurunathagouda S/O Ninganagouda Goudar
The State of Karnataka, Sri Vinay Kulkarni, Sri Tulajappa Sulfi, B.P. Chandrashekar, Basavaraj Shivvappa Muttagi, Vikram Udaykumar Ballari, Kirtikumar Basavaraj Kuratti, Sandeep Alias Sandy Somashekar Savadatti, Vinayak Basavaraj Katagi, Mahabaleshwar Alias Muduka Mallappa Hongal
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal under Section 341 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the dismissal of an application under Section 195-A Cr.P.C.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought to set aside the trial court's order dated 09.01.2019 and direct the court to hold an enquiry on his application filed under Section 195-A Cr.P.C.
Filing Reason
The trial court dismissed the application alleging threats to a witness without conducting an enquiry and without proper consideration of the legal mandates under Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C.
Previous Decisions
Trial court dismissed application on 09.01.2019; earlier application under Section 309 Cr.P.C. was also rejected; writ petition seeking CBI investigation pending in High Court.
Issues
Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the application under Section 195-A Cr.P.C. without conducting an enquiry into the allegations of threats to witnesses.
Whether the provisions of Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C. were properly considered in the context of the application.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that respondent Nos. 2 to 4 threatened witnesses to give false evidence in favor of the accused.
Police conducted a sham investigation and shielded real culprits.
Trial court ignored the legal mandate of Sections 195 and 340 Cr.P.C., which bar cognizance of certain offences without a court complaint.
Witnesses have a right to protection under Article 21, and the fearful environment in court prevented fair testimony.
Trial court failed to act on a memo filed with photographs and videos showing intimidatory gathering of accused's supporters.
Rejection based on alternative view was illegal and non-application of mind.
Judgment Excerpts
An application is filed under Section 195-A of Cr.P.C. requesting the Court below to register the complaint and FIR and refer to the Magistrate for investigation against the police officers i.e. Tulajappa Sulfi Dy.S.P., IG Office, Belagavi and Chandrashekhar, Dy.S.P. Dharwad and Ex-Minister, Vinay Kulkarni, who threatened the witnesses to give evidence favouring the accused.
Section 195 of Cr.P.C. bars the cognizance of certain offences by Magistrates, like the contempt of lawful authority of public servants, offences against public justice and offences relating to documents given in evidence.
The Court below has committed an error in not considering the fact and legal position that Section 195 of Cr.P.C. bars the cognizance...
Procedural History
Charge sheet filed against accused (respondent Nos. 5 to 10) for murder under IPC; trial commenced in S.C. No. 50/2017; CW-19 (appellant) filed application under Section 195-A Cr.P.C. alleging threats by respondent Nos. 2 to 4; trial court dismissed application on 09.01.2019; appeal filed under Section 341 Cr.P.C.; matter heard and reserved for judgment on 14.02.2019; judgment pronounced on 01.03.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 195, 195-A, 340, 341
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 143, 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B, 201, 193, 194, 195, 196, 199, 200, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211
