Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22552 (KAR)

SURESH @ SAI KUMAR @ KUNIGAL SOORI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/4917/2025 · 2025-04-03

Hemant Chandangoudar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14581 CRL.P No. 4917 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4917 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SURESH @ SAI KUMAR @ KUNIGAL SOORI S/O. NAGALINGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT. KALLUPALYA, KASABA HOBLI, KITHNAMANGALA TUMKUR-572 130. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LETHIF B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY BYDARAHALLI POLICE STATION, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. SHASHIKALA W/O. SUNKEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT NO.79, 2ND CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, VALMIKI NAGAR, 2ND STAGE, CHAKRANAGARA MAIN ROAD, ANDRAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 091. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. SAMPATH KUMAR A.V., ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14581 CRL.P No. 4917 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.818/2024 OF BYADARAHALLI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 309(4), 351(2) OF BNS AND SECTION 67(B) OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT ON THE FILE OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent-State. 2. Sri Sampath Kumar, learned counsel files vakalat on behalf of respondent No.2. 3. The petitioner-accused challenges the registration of the First Information Report (FIR) for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, and Section 67(B) of Information Technology Act. 4. The 2nd respondent-defacto complainant lodged the First Information Report (FIR) stating she and accused were consensual with each other and they were in physical contact and at that time the accused took the pictures and used to - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14581 CRL.P No. 4917 of 2025 black mail and demanded money and also took the car of the complainant. 5. Parties are present before this Court and they have filed an application for compounding along with the joint affidavit, stating that, they have amicably settled the disputes among themselves, and in terms of the settlement, the respondent No.2-defacto complainant has agreed to withdraw all the allegations made against the petitioner-accused herein and has no objection for quashing the impugned FIR. 6. The application along with the joint affidavit is placed on record. 7. Given the fact that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute among themselves, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioner-accused is subjected to investigation, since the probability of the police filing the charge sheet is unlikely in view of the settlement. In such circumstances, the continuation of investigation will be an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14581 CRL.P No. 4917 of 2025 ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.818/2024, registered by the Byadarahalli Police Station, insofar it relates to the petitioner-accused herein stands quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE HR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6