M HALAPPA GOWDA Vs. KUPPERAMANE MANJAMMA
LAWS(KAR)-1966-12-1
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Decided on December 01,1966

M.HALAPPA GOWDA Appellant
VERSUS
KUPPERAMANE MANJAMMA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is an application for the transfer of C.C. No. 612/64 on the file of the Special First Class Magistrate, Sagar, which is pending against the present petitioner.
(2.)The facts are these; Respondent who is absent in these proceedings filed a complaint against the petitioner alleging that he had committed an offence punishable under Section 354 I.P.C. Some witnesses on behalf of the complainant including complainant were examined. A charge was framed against the petitioner on 25-11-1965 and the case was posted to 20-12-1965 to ascertain whether he wanted to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. On 20-12-1965 the case was adjourned to 11-1-1966 as the Magistrate was on leave. As 11-1-1966 happened to be a holiday, the case was posted to 4-2-1966. On that day Advocate for the respondent retired, and the petitioner submitted that he would like to cross-examine all the witnesses. The case was adjourned to 2-3-1966 for cross-examination of the witnesses. On 2-3-1966 the witnesses were not present and the case was adjourned to 22-3-1966 and on the adjourned date, no witnesses were present, and therefore the case was adjourned to 19-4-1996. Even on that day there were no witnesses; hence the case was finally adjourned to 4-5-1966, and on which day also, no witnesses were present. In spite of that, the case was adjourned on 12-5-1966. On that day when the case was called, the witnesses were not present. At the request f the counsel for the respondent, the learned Magistrate directed the case to be called later. When it was called again, the witnesses were not present. Again at the request of the counsel for the respondent, the Magistrate directed the case to be called later and when the case was called late in the day, the complainant and one witness were present. The accused made an application praying for an adjournment on the ground that his counsel was unwell. therefore the case was posted to 10-6-1966. On that day, the counsel for the petitioner prayed for an adjournment by filing an application stating therein that he was running high temperature and he could not go on with the case. The learned Magistrate rejected the petition on the ground that the petitioner was dragging on the case. He discharged the witnesses and posted the case to 15-6-1966 for examination of the petitioner and on that day the petitioner was not examined. The case was posted to 24-6-1966. In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed an application under Section 540 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for recalling the witnesses at his cost for further cross-examination, as it was necessary in the interest of justice. The learned Magistrate rejected that application also. The petitioner was examined on 24-6-1966 under Section 342 Cr. P. C. and the case was posted to 15-7-1966 for examination of the defence witnesses. In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed an application in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Shimoga, for transfer of the case. On 15-7-1966 the petitioner did not produce the defence witnesses as he by then had filed a transfer application. The learned Magistrate closed the case.
(3.)The transfer application filed before the learned Sessions Judge by the petitioner was also dismissed. In these circumstances, this petition is filed.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.