Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 608 (KAR)

TV9 KANNADA v. SHASHIDHAR

2014-06-25

S.N.SATYANARAYANA

body2014
Order Petitioner Nos.1 to 7 in Crl.P.No.6264/2013 and petitioner Nos.1 to 5 in Crl.P.No.6107/2012 have come up in these two petitions seeking transfer of criminal cases and private complaint pending in C.C.No.945/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Gokak, C.C.No.14064/2012 pending on the file of IX ACCM Court, Bangalore, C.C.No.1243/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Bellary, P.C.No.58/2012 pending on the file of JMFC II Court, Raichur, C.C.No.2852/2012 pending on the file of III JMFC Court, Tumkur, C.C.No.466/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Koppa, C.C.No.504/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Ankola, C.C.No.1378/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Kundapura and C.C.No.845/2012 pending on the file of JMFC I Court, Gadag (pertaining to Criminal Petition No.6264/2013) and C.C.No.560/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Bijapur, C.C.No.360/2012 pending on the file of II Additional JMFC Court, Ranebennur, C.C.No.50/2012 pending on the file of JMFC Court, Shahapur, C.C.Nos.14253/2012, 14255/2012, 14264/2012, 14272/2012 to 14274/2012 pending on the file of VII ACMM Court, Bangalore, C.C.Nos.8401/2012, 8403/2012 and 8406/2012 pending on the file of IX ACMM Court, Bangalore (pertaining to Criminal Petition No.6107/2012), to any other designated Magistrate Court in the State of Karnataka, on the ground that the petitioners are not getting any legal assistance in all these Taluka places and District Headquarters, where the cases are pending; that there is resistance from the Local Bar to the petitioners in conducting their cases. 2. In these proceedings respondents are complainants in the aforesaid criminal complaints and as well as private complaint pending in various Courts of Judicial Magistrate First Class in Karnataka. Infact, all these proceedings are initiated based on the complaints with reference to an incident which is said to have taken place on 02.03.2012 when a former Minister in the cabinet of Karnataka Assembly was scheduled to be produced in City Civil Court, Bangalore, which is said to have resulted in commotion and unruly situation depicting the advocates in bad light, which is broadcasted by a TV channel, first petitioner, by its staff and others, who are petitioner Nos.2 to 7 in Crl.P.No.6264/2013 and petitioner Nos.2 to 5 in Crl.P.No.6107/2012. These batch of petitions are by visual medias, whereas with reference to similar incident, one more petition was filed in Crl.P.No.10/2013, which was by the Editor and Publisher of a leading Newspaper in the State of Karnataka. These batch of petitions are by visual medias, whereas with reference to similar incident, one more petition was filed in Crl.P.No.10/2013, which was by the Editor and Publisher of a leading Newspaper in the State of Karnataka. The aforesaid criminal petition was filed by the Editor and Publisher of a Newspaper seeking transfer of a criminal complaint, which was pending on the file of JMFC Court, Periyapatna, to any other Court of Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore. 3. In Crl.P.No.10/2013, two rulings of the Apex Court were produced and relied upon to seek transfer under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. This Court by a detailed order dated 03.03.2014 dismissed the said petition on the ground that the petitioners have not made out any ground for transfer of the petition from the Court of JMFC, Periyapatna to any of the Magistrate Court at Bangalore. Subsequently, another petition in Crl.P.No.5582/2013 was filed by Publisher and Editor of a Newspaper, which is said to have published certain articles with reference to the very same incident again depicting the advocates in bad light, also sought transfer of the criminal petition filed against them before the Court of III JMFC, Tumkur, to any of Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Bangalore, which also came to be dismissed on 11.06.2014 on the same line on which Crl.P.No.10/2013 was dismissed. Subsequently these two petitions which are filed seeking transfer of the aforesaid criminal cases and as well as private complaint, have come up for admission. 4. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and as well as contesting respondents, who are complainants in criminal cases referred to supra. After hearing both the parties, the facts and grounds being same as in the case of Criminal Petition Nos.10/2013 and as well as 5582/2013, these two petitions are dismissed for the very same reason assigned in Criminal Petition No.10/2013 by the order of this Court dated 03.03.2014.