- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1431 CRL.P No. 200780 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200780 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. VISHWANATH S/O BANDEPPAYYA JAGIRDAR, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O BANDEPPANAHALLI SALAWADAGI, TQ: TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. 2. SANGAMESH S/O MALLIKARJUN JAGIRADAR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O BANDEPPANAHALLI, SALAWADAGI, TQ: TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. 3. UMADEVI W/O MADIVALAYYA HIREMATH, AGE:56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O KADAKAL, TQ: LINGASUGUR, DIST: RAICHUR-585401. 4. NINGANNAGOWDA S/O ADAPPAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O BALAGANUR, TQ: TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. 5. ANIL A. PATIL, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O BALAGANUR, TQ: TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. Digitally signed by RENUKA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1431 CRL.P No. 200780 of 2024 6. LALEMASHAK S/O KASHIMSAB AWATI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O BALAGANUR, TQ: TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. 7. PRABHUGOUDA BIRADAR, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O BALAGANUR, TQ: TALIKOTI, DIST: VIJAYAPUR-586101. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SANJEEVKUMAR C. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH THE PSI OF TALIKOT PS, REP. BY THE ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH-585102. 2. SIDRAMAWWA W/O SHIVAPUJAYYA HIREMATHA, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O HAGARATAGI, TQ: HUNASAGI, DIST: YADGIR-587121. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI RAJESH G. DODDAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND QUASH THE FIR DATED 28.07.2023 REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.112/2023 OF TALIKOTI POLICE STATION, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) AND CJM COURT, MUDDEBIHAL, BIJAPUR DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 AND 149 IPC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1431 CRL.P No. 200780 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) This petition is filed by the accused to quash the FIR in Crime No.112/2023 registered by the Talikoti Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 149 of IPC. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: It is the case of the prosecution that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have fraudulently entered their names in the land records pertaining to Sy.No.286 measuring 22 acres 37 guntas. It is further stated that the father of the complainant had five children. Her father died intestate leaving the legal heirs and the names of all the five children were mutated in the records of the land bearing Sy.No.286. However, the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 with an intention to deceive the complainant and her sister - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1431 CRL.P No. 200780 of 2024 fraudulently obtained a relinquishment deed and submitted before the Tahsildar on 11.01.2022 and got deleted the names of her and her sister in the RTC and partitioned the property among all the petitioners. Hence, this case. 3. The petitioners have approached this Court by filing this petition seeking to quash the FIR. 4. Heard Sri Sanjeevkumar C. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State and Sri Rajesh G. Doddamani, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the complainant has made several baseless and bald allegations against the petitioners that they have obtained release deed fraudulently and acted upon such document and got deleted the names of the complainant and her sister from RTC and deceived them which appears to be unrealistic and not acceptable. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1431 CRL.P No. 200780 of 2024 6. It is further submitted that respondent No.2/complainant had filed original suit before the jurisdictional Court for partition and the said suit came to be decreed in favour of the complainant and she got property by virtue of the decree. Therefore, creating the forged release deed would not arise and the complainant had filed the complaint only in order to coerce them for partition by metes and bounds. Therefore, the complaint and FIR have to be quashed. Making such submissions, he prays to allow the petition. 7. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader justified the registration of the FIR against the petitioners stating that the matter is under investigation. The investigation would reveal that how the said release deed was obtained by petitioner Nos.1 and 2. When the complainant has stated that the said release deed was forged and bogus, authenticity of the said document has to be tested only on the proper investigation. It is not appropriate at this stage to quash the proceedings without - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1431 CRL.P No. 200780 of 2024 allowing the authority to conduct investigation. Making such submissions, he prays to dismiss the petition. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint, it appears that the names of the complainant and her sister were deleted from the RTC as joint/co- sharers by virtue of the alleged forged release deed. Whether the said document was forged or not has to be tested through the proper investigation. Moreover, the complainant has been successful in getting the decree for partition from the competent Court. Having considered the facts and circumstance of the case, I am of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case to quash the FIR. Therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0 CT:PK