Shivani Thakur
Published on: April 21, 2022 at 21:10 IST
The Karnataka High Court recently Declined to Quash Criminal Proceedings against an Advocate accused of Assaulting and Harassing an intern who was working at a Law Firm.
Single-Judge Justice V Srishananda stated that the Case against the Advocate Vasanth Aditya J cannot be cancelled as the Investigation into the Alleged Cognizable Offenses against him is still on.
“Relief under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code as sought for by the Petitioner cannot be granted by this Court for more than one reason. Firstly, the Investigation is still under progress and Police may file appropriate report after thorough Investigation. Secondly, expressing any opinion at this stage in respect of the merits of the matter, the rights of the parties would be put to Jeopardy. Thirdly, no Court can stop an Investigation in respect of a Cognizable Offence unless a particular person makes out a Case that the very complaint is frivolous in nature and results in abuse of Process of Court,” the Order stated.
The complainant as an intern working in a Kreetam Law Associates, Law Firm, when she requested for Internship Certificate from the Petitioner.
It was alleged that there was an argument and a water bottle was thrown at her due to which she was injured on her chest and her mobile phone was thrown away.
Thereafter, she filed a Complaint against the Petitioner for Offences under Section 67of the Information Technology Act, and Sections 506, 509, 341,324 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Petitioner than approached the Court claiming that the small incident had been blown out of proportion by the Police in Active Collusion with the Complainant.
“Who is the aggressor party, what exactly that transpired are all subject matter of the Investigation and after thorough Investigation, Police may file appropriate Report under Section 173 Criminal Procedure Code. Till such time, this Court cannot form any opinion by considering the Material on Record at this stage”, the Court said.
Therefore, it opined that that as the Investigation is still going on, the Court cannot interfere unless it is shown that the Complaint is frivolous and an abuse of the Process of the Court.