- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3755 CRL.P No. 201701 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201701 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: VIRUPAKSHI MURTHY S/O. R. RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC: COMMISSIONER CMC, GANGAVATHI, KOPPAL DISTRICT-583 227. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANJAY A. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY SINDHANOOR TOWN POLICE STATION, SINDHANOOR, REP BY ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, KALABURAGI. 2. PRADEEP KUMAR S/O. LATE TIMMAPPA PARASI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, WARD NO.19, INDIRANAGAR KARATAGI, KARATAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT-583 229. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VEERSHETTY MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3755 CRL.P No. 201701 of 2024 THIS CRL.P FILED U/S. 528 OF BNSS, PRAYING TO, QUASH THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.172/2024 REGISTERED BY SINDHANOOR TOWN POLICE STATION, RAICHUR DISTRICT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 120(B), 415, 420, 464, 465, 468, 470, 471 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AND NOW THE CASE IS PENDING ON THE FILES OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR DN) AND JMFC COURT, SINDHANOOR, RAICHUR DISTRICT. 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 Sanjay A Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Veeranagouda Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Veershetty Malipatil, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The present petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita-2023 with the following prayer: “WHEREFORE, the petitioner arrayed as accused No.5 humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the First Information Report and complaint in Crime - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3755 CRL.P No. 201701 of 2024 No.172/2024 registered by Sindhanoor Town Police Station, Raichur District for the offence punishable under Section 120-B, 415, 420, 464, 465, 468, 470 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and now the case is pending on the files of Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC Court, Sindhanoor, Raichur District, in the interest of justice.” 3. Upon complaint lodged by Sri Pradeep Kumar-respondent No.2, Sindhanoor police registered a case in Crime No.172/2024 on 05.11.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 415, 420, 464, 465, 468, 470 and 471 of Indian Penal Code. 4. Gist of complaint averments would reveal that petitioner being Commissioner of City Municipal Corporation, Sindhanoor, is responsible for misdeeds in respect of 21 khathas that came to be issued in respect of several lands as detailed in the complaint and therefore, sought for action. 5. Sri Sanjay A Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, similarly filed FIRs against petitioner being quashed, unnecessarily present petitioner is arraigned as accused in the case on hand where he had only supervisory capacity and signed the papers which were prepared by other accused persons and therefore, he cannot be held liable for any - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3755 CRL.P No. 201701 of 2024 one of the offences alleged against him and sought for allowing the petition. 6. Per contra, Sri Veershetty Malipatil, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Sri Veeranagouda Malipatil, learned High Court Government Pleader support the registration of the case and further investigation thereof, by contending that the petitioner being the Commissioner of City Municipal Council, Sindhanoor, had superintendence power apart from responsibility of running the office in a proper and legal manner and therefore, petition needs to be dismissed. 7. Having heard both sides, this Court perused the material on record, meticulously. 8. On such perusal of the material on record, in the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 itself, there are 21 such discrepancies with regard to change of khatha pointed out in respect of several plots. 9. It is also pointed out that accused persons are responsible for the same. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3755 CRL.P No. 201701 of 2024 10. Police, after registering the case, are investigating the matter. If petitioner has no role whatsoever in such illegal transfer of khatha, he can furnish necessary material before the Investigation Officer. 11. If any such material is furnished, the Investigation Officer is bound to consider the same and file appropriate report as is contemplated under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 12. Reserving such liberty for the petitioner, this Court does not find any compelling reasons to quash the very FIR itself, as it is a very rare remedy. 13. Hence the following: ORDER Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29 CT:PK