MR. VASANTH V. FERNANDES v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.P/3018/2024 · 2025-04-04
Hemant Chandangoudar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22660 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22660 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:14564 CRL.P No. 3018 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3018 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN:
1.
MR. VASANTH V. FERNANDES S/O LATE MR SEBASTIAN FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
2.
MRS MARITTA FLAVIAN FERNANDES W/O MR VASANTH V FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
BOTH R/AT NO. 16 ALBERT STREET, RICHMOND TOWN, BANGALORE-560 025. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GUNASHEKAR R.,ADVOCATE FOR P2;
SRI. VASANTH V FERNANDES, P1-PARTY-IN-PERSON)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ASHOKNAGAR POLICE, COMMISSIONERIAT ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025.
REP BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGLAURU -01.
2.
MR HARISH MARIAN FERINANDES S/O LATE MR SEBASTIAN FERNANDES, AGED 51 YEARS, R.//AT NO.16 ALBERT STREET,
Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:14564 CRL.P No. 3018 of 2024
RICHMOND TOWN, BANGALORE-560 025.
3.
MR P B KIRAN INSPECTOR OF POLICE , PULAKESHINAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE-560 05. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M V ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1;
SMT. SIMREN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HARIPRASAD N B, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R3-SERVED)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 14.03.2023 IN PCR NO.58806/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIX A.C.M.M MAYO HALL BENGALURU AT ANNEXURE-A HERETO WHEREBY THE TRIAL COURT HAS REFERRED THE PCR TO THE JURISDICTIONAL POLICE FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION TO REFER THE MATTER FOR PROSECUTION OF THE RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN FOR CRIMINAL CONTEMPT OF THIS HONBLE COURT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners (Accused Nos. 2 and 3) apprehend that the Trial Court may reject the ‘B’ report and take cognizance of the offences alleged against them.
2. That apprehension is unfounded: the Trial Court may reject or accept the ‘B’ report only after complying with the directions issued by this Court in Dr. Ravikumar v. Mrs. K.M.C. Vasantha & Anr. (ILR 2018 KAR 1725).
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:14564 CRL.P No. 3018 of 2024
3. Under those directions, the learned Magistrate must first pass an order rejecting the ‘B’ report, then record the complainant’s sworn statement, and only thereafter register the case.
4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with the following directions: a. The learned XXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bangalore, shall consider the ‘B’ report submitted by Ashoknagar Police Station in PCR No. 58806/2022, and pass an
order either accepting or rejecting it after complying with the guidelines issued in the case of Dr. Ravikumar. b. If the ‘B’ report is rejected and cognizance is taken, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge that order by filing a fresh petition.
5. The petitioners are also at liberty to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against the respondents, in accordance with law. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE
BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 114