- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15784 WP No. 4098 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 4098 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: GURUMURTHI S/O VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT KARABORANAHALLI HATTI VILLAGE, JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 122. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVI M.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY JAVAGAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. MADHU, S/O LATE MALLIKARJUNA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT KURUDAHALLI VILLAGE, JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 122. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, ADOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO a) QUASH / SET ASIDE THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN CC Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15784 WP No. 4098 of 2024 NO. 1483/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ARASIKERE VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND CHARGE SHEET NO. 41/2023 DATED 10/08/2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT JAVAGAL POLICE VIDE ANNEXURE-D BY ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner, who has been charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, and 338 of the Indian Penal Code, has approached this Hon’ble Court seeking the following reliefs: "a) To quash or set aside the criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 1483/2023, currently pending before the Court of the II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Arasikere, as per Annexure-A, and also to quash the Charge Sheet bearing No. 41/2023 dated 10.08.2023, filed by the respondent Javagal Police, as per Annexure-D, by issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, in the interest of justice. b) To direct the respondent Police to conduct a re-investigation into the matter through a different Investigating Officer, other than the one who has initially investigated and filed the aforementioned charge sheet, and to submit a fresh final report by issuance of a Writ of Mandamus. c) To grant such other suitable reliefs or pass any other writ, order, or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15784 WP No. 4098 of 2024 2. The prosecution has alleged that the petitioner, while riding a motorcycle along with his son, collided with the motorcycle being ridden by respondent No. 2, resulting in injuries to the latter. It is further alleged that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding on the part of the petitioner. 3. Despite being duly served with notice, respondent No. 2 has neither appeared in person nor through counsel. Hence, he has been placed ex-parte. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) representing the respondent-State. 5. It is pertinent to note that the FIR was initially lodged by the son of the petitioner, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner himself had sustained injuries due to the rash and negligent riding of respondent No. 2. During the course of investigation, the statements of certain alleged eyewitnesses and of respondent No. 2 were recorded. These eyewitnesses have purportedly claimed that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding by the petitioner. However, respondent No. 2 has stated that the accident was caused by the son of the petitioner. 6. Crucially, the Investigating Officer has neither recorded the statement of the petitioner nor that of his son, both of whom are material witnesses in this case. The charge - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15784 WP No. 4098 of 2024 sheet has been filed solely on the basis of conflicting statements from respondent No. 2 and the alleged eyewitnesses, without recording the version of the petitioner or his son. In such circumstances, the investigation appears to be biased, incomplete, and lacking in fairness. 7. Given this context, it is evident that the investigation has not been conducted in a fair and impartial manner. Therefore, the impugned charge sheet deserves to be quashed. Accordingly, the following order is passed ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.1483/2023 pending on the file of II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Arasikere is hereby quashed. iii. Respondent No.1 to re-investigate the FIR lodged by the son of the petitioner in Cr.No.35/2023 in accordance with law and submit the final report, after recording the statement of the petitioner and his son and other witnesses . Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31 CT: BHK