- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4248 CRL.P No. 5005 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5005 OF 2018 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. B.C. NARAYANA SWAMY S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, ADD: DODDABALLAPURA TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561203 CHARGE SHEET ADDRESS: SANJAYA NAGARA, BANGALORE CITY-560094. 2. RAVI S/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, ADD: KALASAPURA VILLAGE, LAKYA HOBLI, CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUKA, CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577102 CHARGE SHEET ADDRESS: RAJIVGHANDHI NAGAR, LAGGERE, BANGALORE-560 022. PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VENKATESH P DALWAI, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4248 CRL.P No. 5005 of 2018 DODDABALLAPURA TOWN POLICE STATION, BANGALORE RURAL- 561 203 2. SRI G.S. SOMARUDRA SHARMA S/O LATE T G SHIVANNA, AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: NOT KNOWN, ADD: NO.3778, TALUKA OFFICE ROAD, WARD NO.4, DODDABALLAPURA TOWN, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-561 203 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKAT SATHYANARAYAN, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. T. SESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2 (ABSENT)) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1645/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DODDABALLAPURA, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 447, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioners being accused Nos.1 and 2 are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in Crime - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4248 CRL.P No. 5005 of 2018 No.136/2016 of Doddaballapura Town Police Station, Bengaluru Rural District, now pending in C.C. No.1645/2017 on the file of the learned II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC., Doddaballapura (for short, ‘the Trial Court’), registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ for short). 2. The brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 filed the first information against accused No.1 and others alleging commission of the offences as stated above. It is alleged that respondent No.2 is the owner of an open site. It is further alleged that petitioners - accused Nos.1 and 2 have created bogus documents and have illegally entered the property, and tried to install a board claiming ownership over the site. When respondent No.2 questioned their high handedness, petitioners - accused Nos.1 and 2 abused him in filthy language and criminally intimidated to cause his death, and thereby, they have committed the above mentioned offences. 3. After registering the First Information Report, the investigation was undertaken and the charge sheet came to be - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4248 CRL.P No. 5005 of 2018 filed against accused Nos.1 and 2. They are before this Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them now pending before the Trial Court. 4. Heard Sri Venkat Sathyanarayan, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1. Sri Venkatesh P Dalwai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri T. Seshagiri Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2 have not addressed their arguments and there is no representation. Hence, their arguments are taken as nil. 5. In view of the contentions urged by the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and on going through the materials on record, the point that would arise for my consideration is: “Whether the Petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them?" My answer to the above point is in the ‘Negative’ for the following: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4248 CRL.P No. 5005 of 2018 R E A S O N S 6. Respondent No.2 as the informant has filed the first information making specific allegations. Even though FIR was registered against the petitioners and others, further statement of the informant discloses that it was only petitioner Nos.1 and 2 who have committed the offence. After investigation, the charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioners. The prosecution has cited as many as 9 witnesses to substantiate its contentions. Since there are specific allegations made against the petitioners, I do not find any reason to quash the criminal proceedings. 7. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the 'Negative' and pass the following: ORDER The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE SMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12