- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12835 CRL.P No. 1480 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1480 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SRI. VIDYA VIJAYA THEERTHARU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, UTTARADHI KARI VAYASARAYA MATTA, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU CITY - 560 004. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. SHRIHARI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, BASAVANAGUDI POLICE STATION, BENGALURU - 560 004. 2. RAGHAVENDRA G.V. AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, SRI. VYASARAJA MUTT (SOSLE), NO.1 BENNE GOVINDAPPA ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560 004. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VENKATESH S. ARBATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12835 CRL.P No. 1480 of 2022 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AND CHARGE SHEET IN CR.NO.82/2020 IN C.C.NO.1048/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF IV ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406, 409, 417, 420, 465, 149 R/W 120(B) OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER The FIR in crime No.82/2020 registered by Basavanagudi police station, Bengaluru city and the consequent proceedings pending in C.C.No.1048/2022 on the file of the 4th Additional Chief Metropolitan, Bengaluru, is sought to be quashed by the petitioner, arraigned as accused No.3. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri K.Srihari, for petitioner, learned HCGP Smt. Rashmi Patel for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.2 Sri Venkatesh S Arbatti. 3. It is the case of the complainant that one Sri Vidya Vachaspathi Theertharu was the 39th peetadhipathi of Vyasaraj Mutt Sosale and Vidya Manohar Theertharu (accused No.1) was his uttaradhikari, who was ordained as 40th peetadhipathi. The devotees of the mutt filed a suit in O.S.No.16617/2006 to take the inventories of the valuable assets of the mutt. As per the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12835 CRL.P No. 1480 of 2022 court order, inventory was taken under video recordings. Sri Vidya Manohar Theertharu, the 40th peetadhipathi, failed to hand over the valuables to Sri Vidya Shreesha Theertharu as on the date of handing over the charge. Further, Sri Sosle Prakash (accused No.2) was handling the religious and property affairs of Sri Vidya Manohar Theertha as self-proclaimed administrator and general power of attorney holder. The Government of Karnataka appointed Sri K. Jairaj, a retired IAS officer, as the administrator of the mutt in the year 2012. During his tenure, another inventory was done showing a list of valuables, which was signed by Sri Vidya Manohara Theertharu and others. In addition to the movable properties, the said Vidya Manohara Theertharu agreed to hand over all the documents and deeds related to immovable properties belonging to the mutt, but he dishonestly and prominently conceived and held back and failed to hand over the items. Subsequently, he handed over few items to Sri Vidya Sheersha Theertharu, which was videographed and accepted as a genuine one in good faith without verifying the age of the valuables, as per noble traditions; however, the traditions were dishonestly used for deception and to make wrongful gains by the previous - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12835 CRL.P No. 1480 of 2022 peetadipathi and the administrator of the mutt etc., Further, Sri Vidya Vijaya Theertharu, claiming to be a bidi sannyasi, along with Ramachandra Srikant from Anantapur and unknown persons, has criminally conspired by forming an unlawful assembly to dispose of or destroy the valuables of Sri Vyasaraja Mutt, Sosale, which requires investigation. 4. As could be seen from the complaint averments, the allegation against the petitioner is one of criminal conspiracy. The complainant has made bald and vague allegations that petitioner could also be part of the conspiracy, whereas, the main allegations are against accused No.1 and accused No.2. The complainant has raised suspicion that along with the said accused, other persons could have criminally conspired and aided to dispose of the movables. 5. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the complaint, it is stated that nobody else has any access to the valuables unless physically permitted and therefore, Sri Vidya Manohara Theertha (accused No.1) handed over the idols to the new peetadhipathi and it was accepted as genuine one in good faith. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12835 CRL.P No. 1480 of 2022 6. As noted above, except making bald and vague allegations that even the petitioner could be part of conspiracy there are no specific or distinct allegation against him. It is pertinent to see that the complainant has settled the dispute with Sri S.N.Prakash (accused No.2) and also Madivala Ramachandra Rao (accused No.4) against whom similar allegations of conspiracy are made. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has furnished copies of the orders passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.5580/2022 disposed on 20.12.2024 and Crl.P.No.5158/2023 disposed on 17.12.2024. This Court, in the light of settlement arrived at between the parties therein, has quashed the proceedings. 8. It is vehemently contended by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 417, 406, 409 read with Section 120B and 149 of the IPC and there is sufficient material to show that even the petitioner has conspired with other accused persons. 9. Even a perusal of the charge-sheet material shows that the main allegation is against accused No.1. It is alleged - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:12835 CRL.P No. 1480 of 2022 that he conspired with accused No.2 and in cooperation with accused No.3 and accused No.4, failed to hand over the valuable assets, including idols. However, accept bald allegation, there are no sufficient material against the petitioner to show that he has conspired with accused No.1 or that the valuables are in his possession. When this Court has quashed the proceedings against accused No.4, similarly placed as the petitioner, the petitioner would also be entitled for the relief sought in the petition. Accordingly, the following: ORDER i. The criminal petition is allowed; ii. The entire proceedings in C.C.No.1048/2022 on the file of 4th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru against the petitioner is quashed. I.A.No.1/2022 for stay disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15 CT: BHK