- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:781 CRL.P No. 104058 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 101325 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 104058 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101325 OF 2022 IN CRL.P. NO.104058 OF 2022: BETWEEN: DR. ABDUL MALAGI S/O. AMINSAB MALAGI AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. DOCTOR, R/O. PHC, YALAVATTI, TQ. SHIRHATTI, DIST. GADAG-582117. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.M. JAVED, ADVOCATE) AND: CHIEF MINISTERIAL OFFICER (CMO) O/O. PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI-580021. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO, QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED (ACCUSED NO. 5) PENDING FILE BEFORE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI IN C.C. NO. 2925/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE U/S 340 OF CR.P.C., SEC. 139 OF IPC. IN CRL.P. NO.101325 OF 2022: BETWEEN: 1. SADDAM @ SADDAM HUSSAIN S/O. ABDULSAB PITAGI, AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. HAMALI, B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.24 11:51:17 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:781 CRL.P No. 104058 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 101325 of 2022 R/O. TADAS, TQ. SHIGGAON, NOW R/O. OPP APMC, ISHWAR NAGAR, GANESH COLONY, HUBBALLI-580031. 2. NOOR AHMED S/O. MAQBOOLSAB SUNKAD AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. HAMALI, R/O. TADAS, TQ. SHIGGAON, NOW R/O. OPP APMC, ISHWAR NAGAR, GANESH COLONY, HUBBALLI-580031. 3. ABDUL GAFAR S/O. MEHABOOBSAB KALGHATGI, AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. HAMALI, R/O. TADAS, TQ. SHIGGAON, NOW R/O. OPP APMC, ISHWAR NAGAR, GANESH COLONY, HUBBALLI-580031. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. R.M.JAVED AND SRI. P.M. VIRAKTAMATH, ADVOCATES) AND: CHIEF MINISTERIAL OFFICER (CMO) O/O. PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI-580021. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO, CALL FOR RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED (ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3) PENDING FILE BEFORE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUBBALLI IN CC NO.2925/2022 FOR THE OFFENCE U/S 193 OF IPC. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:781 CRL.P No. 104058 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 101325 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners challenge the cognizance taken for the offence punishable under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2. Accused Nos.1 to 3 had filed claim petitions under Section 164 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the jurisdictional MACT, seeking just and appropriate compensation for injuries sustained in an accident. In these proceedings, the injured claimants relied on a wound certificate issued by accused No.5 (a doctor), stating that the injuries sustained by them were simple in nature. After trial, the MACT held that the wound certificate produced by the claimants was fabricated in collusion with accused No.5 to fraudulently claim compensation. Consequently, the claim petitions were dismissed, and the MACT directed the Chief Ministerial Officer (CMO) to lodge a complaint under Section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.). The CMO lodged the complaint, and the learned Magistrate, upon perusal, took cognizance of the offence alleged against the petitioners. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent/State. 4. Section 340 of Cr.P.C. specifies that if a court is of the opinion that an offence under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 195 has been committed, it may, after conducting a preliminary inquiry and recording a finding to that effect, make a written complaint. In the present case, the MACT dispensed with the mandatory preliminary inquiry required under Section 340 of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:781 CRL.P No. 104058 of 2022 C/W CRL.P No. 101325 of 2022 Cr.P.C. Furthermore, the MACT, without recording a specific finding that the petitioners had committed an offence under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 195 of Cr.P.C., directed the concerned officer to lodge a complaint. This is contrary to Section 340(1)(b) of Cr.P.C., which mandates that the court must make a written complaint and then forward it to the Magistrate having jurisdiction. Consequently, the complaint lodged by the Chief Ministerial Officer and the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences are without jurisdiction. 5. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No.2925/2022 on the file of the learned I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Hubballi, insofar as they relate to petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55