- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2037 CRL.P No. 201246 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201246 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: PRAVEEN S/O BHEEMSINGH CHAWAN, OCC: SOCIAL WORKER, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O. KERUR TANDA, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585236. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI BHEEMSINGH CHAWAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION, REP. BY ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI-585 103. 2. MAYUR S/O KRISHNA REDDY, OCC: STUDENT, AGE: 26 YEARS, R/o. ASIAN GARDENIA APARTMENT, KALABURAGI CITY, TQ. AND DIST. KALABURAGI-585102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C(OLD)/ U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS ACT,2023 PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION OF PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO. 4 AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SC NO. 139 OF 2022 IN CRIME NO.2 OF 2020 WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION KALABURAGI FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 323, 504, 307 R/W 34 OF IPC AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. DIST. AND SESSIONS COURTS AT KALABURAGI. Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2037 CRL.P No. 201246 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) 1. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.4 being aggrieved by the filing of charge sheet against him in S.C No.139/2022 arising out of Crime No.2/2020 for the offences punishable under sections 323, 504, 307 r/w 34 of IPC pending on the file of Principal District and Sessions Court at Kalaburagi. Factual matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the brother of the complainant had borrowed a loan of Rs.10,000/- from accused No.1. It was not repaid to the accused No.1. The brother of the complainant by one or the other pretext was dodging the matter and he was not returning the money. On 03.01.2020, around 11.15 a.m., the complainant had received a message stating that his brother had fell down to the ground floor. He went there - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2037 CRL.P No. 201246 of 2024 along with his family members and got him admitted to the hospital for treatment. 3. On receiving the said information regarding the incident, he lodges a complaint before the respondent - police. The respondent - police after registering the FIR, conducted the investigation and submitted the charge sheet. 4. Heard Sri.Ravi Bheemsingh Chawan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 – State. Respondent No.2 is served and unrepresented. 5. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.4 in the charge sheet. His name has not been mentioned in the complaint as well as in the FIR. The overt-act against the petitioner is that, he came along with accused Nos.1 and 2 on his motorcycle near Asian Gardenia at Kalaburagi where the alleged incident had taken place. However, no overt-act had been attributed against him. Even the victim had not stated anything about him in his statement. Such being the fact, asking him to appear before the Trial Court to face the trial would be an abuse - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2037 CRL.P No. 201246 of 2024 of process of law. Therefore, the case against him is required to be quashed. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently submitted that whether the petitioner had an intention to commit the offence or not is a matter of fact, the same came to be decided in the trial. 7. It is further submitted that it is an admitted fact that, the petitioner was present and he came along with other two accused on his motorcycle to the spot. There, accused No.1 had assaulted and thrown the victim from the building towards ground floor, consequently, the victim had sustained severe injuries on various parts of his body. Therefore, it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. Making such submissions, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 prays to dismiss the petition. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the averments of the complaint and the charge sheet, it would indicate that the victim, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2037 CRL.P No. 201246 of 2024 namely, Sri.Sharanabasava Reddy was working as Manager at Bahumani Bar and Restaurant and he stated to have borrowed Rs.10,000/- from accused No.1 and also he was evading in making payment. 9. Whenever, he was asked to repay the amount, by one or the other pretext, he was avoiding. Being frustrated by the act of the victim, accused Nos.1 and 2 along with accused No.4 stated to have gone to the house of the victim and saw that he was coming from ‘A’ Block towards ‘E’ Block and accused No.1 stated to have assaulted him and also pushed him through ventilator, consequently, he fell down and sustained injuries. Even on reading the entire averments of the charge sheet, nothing is demonstrated to implicate accused No.4 in this case. 10. It is settled principles of law that on reading the complaint in its entirety, if no case is made out against the particular accused, asking him to face the trial, certainly, would be an abuse of process of law. In such circumstances, the Courts are required to exercise inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings in order to secure the ends of justice. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2037 CRL.P No. 201246 of 2024 11. Having considered the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the number of cases, in the present case, the accused No.4 had not committed any offences as stated in the complaint. Having considered the overt-act attributed against accused No.4, I am of the considered opinion that the proceedings in this case in respect of accused No.4 has to be quashed, if not, it would be an abuse of the process of law, hence, the charge sheet is liable to be quashed against the petitioner. 12. In the light of the observation made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The entire proceedings in S.C No.139/2022 arising out of Crime No.2/2020 pending on the file of Principal District and Sessions Court at Kalaburagi, as against the petitioner, is quashed. SD/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE TMP/UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53 CT:PK