Minute Procedural Aberration In Magistrate's Order Rejecting 'B' Report And Taking Cognizance Doesn't Prejudice Accused: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by eight murder accused challenging Magistrate court's order taking cognizance of the offence alleged against them and rejecting the ‘B Report’ filed by the police.A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the petitioners contention regarding procedural defects in the cognizance order as the sworn statement was recorded...
The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition filed by eight murder accused challenging Magistrate court's order taking cognizance of the offence alleged against them and rejecting the ‘B Report’ filed by the police.
A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna rejected the petitioners contention regarding procedural defects in the cognizance order as the sworn statement was recorded even before the rejection of the 'B' report.
The bench relied on the Apex Court in the case of Pradeep S. Wodeyar vs the State of Karnataka and said, “The defect in the case at hand does not and cannot be seen to be cutting at the root of the matter...a minute procedural aberration in a case where the learned Magistrate would reject the 'B' report and take cognizance cannot cause any prejudice to the petitioner.”
Petitioners had argued that rejection of 'B' report runs foul of the judgment of the coordinate Bench in Ravi Kumar v. Mrs. K.M.C. Vasantha and Another (2018) and thus the matter should be remanded, in the least for the appropriate consideration of the 'B' report.
The complainant opposed the plea saying the Investigating Officer"deliberately" left out important and minute details and therefore the concerned Court has rejected the 'B' report.
The bench on going through the order passed by the Magistrate court disagreed with petitioners' contention that it suffers from non-application of mind. "The order supplies cogent reasons,” it said.
Further it noted that the impugned order does not reject the 'B' report at all and takes cognizance of the offence against the petitioners. "This is, at best, a curable procedural defect,” it said.
Dismissing the petition the bench said “I decline to accept the said submission of the so called procedural aberration for even a remand to the hands of the learned Magistrate. None of the grounds so urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners would hold any water.”
Case Title: H N Nagarajegowda & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2746 OF 2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 269
Date of Order: 28-06-2023
Appearance: Advocate Pratheep K C for Petitioners.
HCGP Mahesh Shetty for R1.
Advocate Rajath for R2.