- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2796 CRL.P No. 200928 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200928/2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI SHARANAGOUDA P. MALIPATIL, S/O. PARVATHAREDDY S. PATIL, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MADARKAL VILLAGE, TQ. DEVADURGA, DIST. RAICHUR-584 113. …PETITIONER (BY SRI ARUNKUMAR AMARGUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH MANVI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH, KALABURAGI-585 107. 2. SRI PARASHURAM S/O KRISHNAPPA CHOWDKI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: REPORTER, R/O. KONAPURPET, MANVI, Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2796 CRL.P No. 200928 of 2024 TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR-584 123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ARATI PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS-2023, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND FURTHER QUASH THE CHARGE-SHEET IN CRIME NO.114/2023 OF MANVI P.S., DIST. RAICHUR, AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.(AC) NO.576/2023, ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, RAICHUR, AT RAICHUR, AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 504, 506 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)(a) OF SC/ST (PoA) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015. 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) 1. Heard learned counsel Sri Arunkumar Amargundappa for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the 1st respondent-State. Respondent No.2 served with the notice and remained absent. 2. This petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS praying to quash the charge-sheet in Crime No.114/2023 on the file of Manvi Police Station, Raichur, now pending in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2796 CRL.P No. 200928 of 2024 Spl.(AC) No.576/2023 before the I Additional Sessions Judge, Raichur, at Raichur, against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)(a) of SC/ST(PoA) Amendment Act, 2015. 3. The facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under: Upon the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, - Manvi Police registered a case in Crime No.114/2023 on 07.05.2023 for the aforesaid offences. After registering the case, Police investigated the matter and on 08.05.2023 complainant said to have given a further statement, whereunder, the allegations leveled against the petitioner which would attract the offence punishable under the provisions of Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act was given go-bye. Despite the same, the Police filed charge-sheet against the petitioner including for the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)(a) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2796 CRL.P No. 200928 of 2024 Learned Special Judge on receipt of charge-sheet has taken cognizance of the offences alleged against the accused persons including the petitioner for all the offences. Therefore, petitioner is before this Court with the aforesaid prayer. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Arunkumar Amargundappa would contend that when there is a clear statement by the complainant himself that petitioner was not party to the abusive words spoken by the other accused which would attract the offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)(a) of ST/ST (PoA) Act, the proceedings against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences is totally unwarranted and sought for quashing of the pending charge-sheet against the petitioner. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader supports the order of taking cognizance and proceeding with the case as against the petitioner also. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2796 CRL.P No. 200928 of 2024 6. The second respondent, who is de-facto complainant though served with notice of this petition and remained absent. 7. Having heard the arguments of both side, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. On such perusal of the material on record, taking cognizance by the learned Special Judge for the purpose of proceeding with the case cannot be faulted with inasmuch as it is only at the time of framing the charge, learned Special Judge is required to charge the accused persons for the relevant offences based on the material collected in the charge-sheet. 8. In the case on hand, since further statement of the complainant is available on record, whereunder, he has exonerated the petitioner with the offences punishable under the provisions under Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v)(a) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act, it is always open for the petitioner to make a suitable request before the Special Judge at the time of framing the charge to frame appropriate charge/s. Despite such request, if the learned Special Judge frames the charge/s against the petitioner for the offences under the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2796 CRL.P No. 200928 of 2024 provisions of SC/ST (PoA) Act, it is always open for the petitioner to approach this Court with specific prayer. 9. At this stage it is too premature to entertain such a request on behalf of the petitioner. Further, the material on record prima facie would attract the other IPC offences against the petitioner. Therefore, the learned Special Judge is at liberty to frame appropriate charge/s and petitioner also be tried by the learned Special Judge himself along with the other offences. 10. With the above observation, the criminal petition is disposed of. Sd/- (V. SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 CT:PK