The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a criminal case against a Bengaluru driver accused of driving into an on-duty traffic police head constable during a drunk-driving enforcement operation in 2021, saying a vehicle cannot be used as an instrument of threat or violence.
A single-judge bench led by Justice M. Nagaprasanna dismissed a petition filed by RamAnjalu, a resident of Nagarabhavi, seeking the cancellation of the criminal proceedings against him. The case relates to an incident within the limits of the HAL police station, where traffic police were conducting a special operation to identify motorists driving under the influence of alcohol.
According to the report, RamAnjalu, who is identified as a general manager at ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company, was driving a Hyundai Creta on October 23, 2021. A head constable attached to the HAL Airport Traffic Police Station allegedly attempted to stop the vehicle for inspection.
The police officer alleged that the driver did not stop and instead moved the car forward at speed in an attempt to evade the check. The head constable said the vehicle was driven into him, causing injuries to his thighs and feet. He also alleged that the vehicle damaged the device used to detect drunk driving.
The complaint was filed the following day. Based on it, HAL police registered a first information report under Sections 353, 307, 279, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The charges relate to alleged obstruction or assault of a public servant, attempt to murder, rash driving, damage to property and criminal intimidation.
The petitioner approached the High Court seeking to end the case before the allegations were examined in a full criminal proceeding. The court rejected that request, holding that the conduct alleged in the complaint did not warrant the proceedings being cancelled at this stage.
The court said it could not show leniency towards an accused alleged to have driven a car into a police officer who was lawfully performing official duties. It further observed that a vehicle could not be converted into an instrument of threat or violence.
The judgment also stated that quashing the case without examining the allegations would cause the rule of law to lose its meaning. The order therefore allows the criminal case registered by HAL police to continue through the legal process.
