RAMANNA GOWDA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Second respondent filed FIR No.384/2015 on 31.12.2015 in Soladevanahalli Police Station, alleging that accused had abused and threatened petitioners with dire consequences and removed the photograph of Shri Ambedkar. Police, after investigation have filed charge sheet alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 447, 504, 506, 355 r/w 34 of Penal Code and 3(1)(10) of ST & ST Act.

(2.) Learned Special Judge, by order dated 30.04.2016, has issued process. Petitioners, in this petition, have challenged criminal proceedings pending before the learned Special Judge.

(3.) Shri Sunil S.Rao, learned advocate for the petitioners contended that the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge dated 30.04.2016, is without application of mind. He placed reliance on the judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court in Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2015 4 SCC 609 (paragraph No.40) and Mehmood Ul Rehman Vs. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and others., 2015 12 SCC 420 (paragraph No.22). In substance, the contention of learned Counsel is that order of taking cognizance must demonstrate that learned trial Judge had applied his mind. He argued that the order passed by the learned Session Judge does not disclose application of mind. Accordingly, he prayed for allowing this petition.