IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATARA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3’ DAY OF JUNE 2011 B EFC RE THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE A.SPACHHAPURE CRIMINAL PETITION NO.10481 L20 11 BETWEEN: Sri. Go pal Naclaouda, S/o. Ranganarh Nadagouda, Aged about 46 years, The Senior Sub- Registrar, Jamkhancli, Dist: BagalI<ote. PETITIONER [By Sri Mrutvunjaya Tata Bangi. ADV.,) AND: The State of Karnataka, Rep. by the Additional State Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka. Circuit Bench, Dharwad. ... RESPDNDENT (By Sri.Anand K. Nava1imath. HCGP..) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 ol Ci P C seeking to quash thu entire proceedings on the file of the PrI. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.J. Jarnkhandi registered in Crl.Mise.No.02/ 2010 This petition coming on for admission this day. the court made the following: ORDER The petition is filed for quashing the proceedings on the file of Prl.Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) 1 Jamkhandi registered in Crl.Misc.No.2 /2010. 2. The facts reveals that. in the suit bearing ().S.No.251 ‘2005 on the file of Prl. Civil .Judgc (Sr.dn.). .Iamkhandi, encumbrance certificate was produced by the defendant and the said document was issued by the sub registrar. 3. During the course of trial, the court held that encumbrance certificate was issued without seeing the loan transactions said to have been entered. It is in these circumstances. that the trial court while decreeing the suit suo motto took an action under Section 340 Cr.P.C. for holding an enquir) n respect ol the offence enumerated under Section 195 (1)(b) of Cr.P.C. and therefore, ordered for a preliminary enquiry by registering Cr1. Misc. 2/10. It is 3 registration of the said proceeding hic’h has been challenged before this court. 3. I havc heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned High Court Government Pleader. 4. Ex.D.2 is undisputedly issued by the petitioner who was the sub registrar and the court has suspected the genuineness of this document and therefore, ordered a preliminary enquiry under Section 340 of Cr.P.C Though Ex.D.2 is issued in discharge of the official duty, so far as preliminary enquiry to be held by the court, there is no necessity of any sanction and the petitioner does not have any immunity from holding an enquiry under the said provisions. The enquiry is confined only to record. as so vhether any of the offences. prima facie, mentioned in Section 195 (l)(b) have been committed or with the sole purpose of filing complaint in writing and in case if it is so. after such preliminary enquiry if complaint is to be 4 lodged, then onis 11w question of obtaining sanction arises for consideration. So far as discretion exercised b the court below, for holding a preliminar> nquir> , when a notice has been issued, the same cannot be challenged under the proisions of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. In the context of t he circumstances stated above, and in that ‘Jew of the matter, I do not find any merit in I he iw ition and it is dismissed accordingly JUDGE R m s/