Bengaluru Police Commissioner Moves Karnataka HC Against Magistrate's Order To Probe Complaint Alleging Delay In Ramesh Jarkiholi Case

A single Judge bench of Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar is likely to hear the petition today. As per the petition filed by Pant, Deputy Commissioner of Police M N Anucheth and Police Inspector Maruthi B, have said, "The impugned order passed by the magistrate is contrary to law, facts and material available on record and as such the magistrate has slipped into an error, resulting in grave miscariage of justice to the petitioners."

The magistrate court had issued the order based on a private complaint filed by one Adarsh R Iyer. The petition filed through Advocate P Prasanna Kumar, states that, "The magistrate has mechanically passed the impugned order without even mentioning whether the allegations stated in the private complaint would satisfy the ingredients of cognizable offences as against the petitioners."

The petition gives details about the probe conducted by the police on the initial complaint filed by one Dinesh Kallahalli by the Cubbon park police, seeking to investigate the case against Jarkiholi. It then says, "This being the true state of affairs, the second respondent (Iyer) being no-where concerned with the said incident gave a representation dated March 17, 2021, to the Cubbon Park police with a request to register FIR against the petitioners alleging that they have failed to take action based on complaint given by Kallahalli."

However, by then the third petitioner had closed the representation/information given by Kallahalli since the said information did not disclose the commission of any cognizable offence as the same was bald and vague. An endorsement was issued to the complainant informing that the preliminary inquiry was considered and the representation made by Kallahalli, was closed with the time prescribed by the Apex Court in the case of Lalitha Kumari vs State of UP.

The plea also states that an FIR is registered based on the complaint given by the victim girl. Hence the allegations made by Iyer that the petitioners have failed to record any information given to them under section 154 (1) of CrPC is far from the truth.

It is also said that an SIT was constituted by an order issued by the Commissioner of Police and the investigation carried out is now being investigated by the High Court. There exists no dereliction of duty on part of the petitioners.

The petition by way of interim relief seeks to stay the operation, execution and all further proceedings pursuant to the order dated November 23, passed by the Magistrate court.