The Karnataka High Court has canceled the FIR, stating that the complainant must submit a sworn affidavit with the application under Section 156(3) of the CrPC.
The Karnataka High Court canceled an FIR, stating that a complainant must submit a sworn affidavit when applying under Section 156 (3) of the CrPC. The Court overturned the reference order made by the Principal Civil Judge and the Judicial Magistrate, along with the FIR registered under Sections 420, 504, and 506 in conjunction with Section 34 of the IPC, because the Supreme Court’s ruling in Priyanka Srivastava v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2015) was not adhered to. Justice Mohammad Nawaz noted that the Magistrate’s order indicated that the complainant’s lawyer claimed the police had not registered the case, despite a complaint being sent to higher authorities. The Magistrate then referred the case for investigation under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. The lawyer for the second respondent mentioned that a postal receipt was submitted with the complaint, but admitted that no sworn affidavit was provided by the complainant, as required by the Priyanka Srivastava ruling.
Advocate Sanjay A. Patil represented the Petitioners, while HCGP Anita M. Reddy represented the Respondents. The Petitioners aimed to annul the order under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. and the FIR, arguing that the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Priyanka Srivastava were not followed. The Complainant accused the Petitioners of misusing two cheques issued as security by filing a false case against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The private complaint included charges under Sections 420, 504, and 506 along with Section 34 of the IPC, leading the Magistrate to refer the case for police investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C.
The High Court reaffirmed the legal stance from the Priyanka Srivastava case, highlighting the importance of submitting an affidavit. This ensures that applicants are aware and do not submit false affidavits, as providing false information can lead to legal action. As a result, the Court decided to overturn the order from March 9, 2023, made by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC in Shahapur, along with the registration of the FIR at the Shahapur Police Station.
Cause Title: Parvati & Anr. v. The State of Karnataka & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC-K:8203)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocate Sanjay A. Patil
Respondents: HCGP Anita M. Reddy; Advocate Mahadev S. Patil
