- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200522 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. DHARMANAYAK S/O SAKRANAYAK, AGE:64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 2. TARABAYI W/O DHARMANAYAK, AGE:60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 3. KESU @KESU NAIK S/O DHARMANAYAK, AGE:42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 4. RAMESH S/O DHARMANAYAK, AGE:35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE. 5. UMIBAYI W/O KESHU NAYAK, AGE:30 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, ALL ARE R/O. BAILAPUR TANDA, TQ. HUNSAGI, DIST.YADGIRI. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH, HUNASAGI POLICE STATION, TQ.HUNASAGI DIST.YADGIRI, Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 IT’S REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH, DIST.KALABURAGI-585103. 2. SHREE SUBHASH S/O NARAYANA JADHAV, AGE:47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. BAILAPUR TANDA, TQ.HUNSAGI, DIST.YADGIRI-585205. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ARATI PATIL ,HCGP FOR R1; SRI R.S. LAGALI, ADVOCATE APPEARED FOR SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 ) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS,2023 PRAYING TO, IT IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE PETITION, CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO. 100/2024. (HUNASAGI POLICE STATION) OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 108, 352, 351(3), 190 OF BNS ACT 2023 IN CC NO. 40/2025 NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, SHORAPUR. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri. Ganesh Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Arati Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. R.S.Lagali, learned - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 counsel on behalf of Sri. Sanganagouda V. Biradar, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 2. This petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, with the following prayer: “Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that, this Hon’ble Court be pleaed to; It is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to allow the petition, call for the records and quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.100/2024, (Hunasagi Police Station) offences punishable under Section 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 108, 352, 351(3), 190 of BNS Act, 2023 in C.C.No.40/2025 now pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Shorapur, in the interest of justice.” 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under: 3.1. The respondent No.2 had a daughter by name Ranjita. There was an matrimonial alliance talk between Sakra Naik and Ranjita. The complainant said to have been refused to give his daughter in marriage to Sakra Naik. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 3.2. In that regard, the petitioners along with Sakra Naik said to have visited the house of the complainant on 05.09.2024 and demanded that, Ranjita should be given in marriage to Sakra Naik. In the heated discussions, the petitioners along with Sakra Naik said to have threatened the complainant and his wife that if Ranjita is not given in marriage to Sakra Naik, they would take away the life of the complainant and his family members. 3.3. After they left the place, the complainant tried to convene a panchayat with the elders of the community and went near the Sevanaik Chowk. As they were completely aware of the facts with regard to the alliance. When he was near the said Sevanaik Chowk, his daughter Ranjita came there with a bottle of pesticide and informed the complainant that being unable to bear the insult that has been caused to the complainant by Sakra Naik, i.e. Sakra Naik assaulting the complainant, she has consumed the pesticide. Immediately, she was taken to the hospital for treatment, wherein she succumbed despite best treatment. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 3.4. Thereafter, the complaint came to be lodged with Hunsagi Police Station, Yadgiri district. The police after registering the case in Crime No.100/2024, after thorough investigation filed charge-sheet against Sakra Naik and these petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 115(2), 126(2), 108, 352, 351(3) and 190 of BNS, 2023. 4. The petitioners after obtaining the bail, have approached this Court stating that, the element of abetment is not forthcoming either in the complaint or in the charge-sheet materials and mere uttering the words “JuÉÚ PÀÄrzÀÄ ¸Á¬Ä” would not be sufficient enough to proceed criminally against the petitioners and sought for allowing the petition. 5. Sri. Ganesh Naik, learned counsel would submit that, the petitioners have been unnecessarily arraigned as accused and at any rate the words allegedly uttered namely “JuÉÚ PÀÄrzÀÄ ¸Á¬Ä” would not ipso facto is treated as abetment for suicide and sought for allowing the petition. 6. Per contra, Sri. R.S.Lagali, learned counsel for the de facto complainant and the learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that, but for uttering the words namely - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 “JuÉÚ PÀÄrzÀÄ ¸Á¬Ä” and the assault made by the first accused to the father of the deceased, the unfortunate incident would not have occurred. Therefore, all the petitioners are liable to face trial for the charge of abetment to commit suicide. Therefore, the petition needs to be dismissed. 7. On perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that, the only allegations against the petitioners in the complaint itself is that, they had accompanied Sakra Naik to the house of the complainant. 8. In the quarrel who has uttered the exact words “JuÉÚ PÀÄrzÀÄ ¸Á¬Ä” is not forthcoming on record. 9. Assuming that, all the petitioners have subscribed to the said uttering, mere uttering of those words would not ipso facto itself cannot be termed as an abetment to commit suicide as per the settled principles of law governing the field. 10. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that, in the absence of specific allegations against the petitioners, continuation of the criminal proceedings as against the petitioners would result in abuse of process of law. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3220 CRL.P No. 200522 of 2025 11. Accordingly, the following order: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is allowed; (ii) Pending Criminal proceedings as against the petitioners herein in C.C.No.40/2025 pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Court (Jr. Dn.) Shorapur, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 CT:PK