- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3772 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI SHIVAPRAKASH S/O. LATE JAVARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, NO.414, 2ND BLOCK, KOPPA VILLAGE HARAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, KOPPA, MYSORE, KARNATAKA - 571104. 2. SRI. GIRISHA D K, S/O. LATE D N KENCHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS NO.375, KOPPA VILLAGE AND POST HARAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, KOPPA MYSORE, KARNATAKA-571104 3. SRI. SURESH K S S/O. LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS KOPPA VILLAGE AND POST HARAHALLI HOBLI,PERIYAPATNA TALUK, KOPPA, MYSORE, KARNATAKA-571104 4. SRI. RAMCHANDRA K R S/O LATE RAMASHETTY 2ND BLOCK, KOPPA VILLAGE, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSORE DIST. KARNATAKA-571104 Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 5. SRI. ABDUL RAZAK S/O ABDUL RAHAMAN 180, KOPPA VILLAGE AND POST 2ND BLOCK HARANAHALLI HOBLI PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSORE DIST. KARNATAKA-571104 6. SRI.MEERA MOHIDDIN S/O LATE NAZEER AHMED NO.2-95/1, 2ND DIVISION KUSHALANAGAR TOWN, SOMVARPET TALUK KODAGU KARNATAKA - 571234 7. SRI. KASHI KUMAR S/O LATE POOVAIAH, MARUR GRAMA, PIRIYAPATTANA TALUK, MYSORE, KOPPA, KARNATAKA-571104 8. SRI. S. RAMU S/O SANNAIAH, ILAPURA VILLAGE NANDINATHPUR POST, KASABA HOBLI PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSORE, KARNATAKA- 571107 9. SRI.SHIVARAJU S/O LATE CHENNAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS NO.341 3RD BLOCK KUSHALANAGARA TOWN SOMAWARPET TALUK KUSHALANAGAR, KODAGU KARNATAKA - 571234 10. SRI.CHENNAIAH C J S/O JAVARAIAH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 3RD BLOCK, KALAMMA COLONY, KUSHALANAGAR HOBLI, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 SOMAVARPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT, KARNATAKA 11. SRI.N. MALLIKA S/O NINGAIHA KOPPA POST HARANAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK CHIKKAHOSURU MYSORE KARNATAKA - 571104 12. SRI. PANDURANGA M S/O LATE MAHANTAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS HARANAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK KOPPA, MYSORE, KARNATAKA-571104 13. SRI. RAMASWAMY S/O LATE KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS NO.117, KOPPA POST 1ST BLOCK HARANAHALLI HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, KOPPA, MYSORE, KARNATAKA-571104 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIJETHA R NAIK.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BYLAKUPPE POLICE STATION, MYSURU DIST. REP. BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU-560 001. 2. SRI. GOVINDAIAH S/O. LATE HELAVAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS DHARMADARSHI MILIND EDUCATIONAL - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 INSTITUTION GIRIGURU R/OF NO.1255, 4TH CROSS PADUVANA ROAD, KUMVEMPUNAGAR MYSURU DISTRICT KARNATAKA - 571104 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL SPP FOR R1; R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN SPL.C.NO.63/2022 SUBMITTED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 BY BYLAKUPPE POLICE, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 448, 504, 427, 506, 114, 149 OF IPC, 1860 AND SEC. 3(1)(r)(s) SC AND ST (POA) AMENDMENT ORDINANCE 2014, U/S 3(2)(v-a) OF SC AND ST (POA) ACT, 1989, PENDING ON THE FILE OF 6TH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, MYSURU DISTRICT, MYSURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition is preferred by petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 to 13 in Spl.Case No.63/2022 on the file of VI Addl. District and Sessions Court, Mysuru (for short 'the trial Court'), registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 448, 504, 506, 427, 114, 149 of IPC and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance Act, 2014 (for short ‘the said Amendment Act of 2014’) and under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘ the said Act of 1989’) 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl.SPP for the 1st respondent – State and perused the material on record. The respondent No.2 having been served with the notice, he has chosen to remain unrepresented and has not contested the petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the FIR, statement of witnesses, charge sheet, documents etc., in order to point out that except the complaint and statement of 2nd respondent-complainant, the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the said Amendment Act of 2014 and Section 3(2)(v-a) of the said Act of 1989, have not been made out against the petitioners. It is submitted that in fact, except making vague and bald allegations only against petitioner No.1 - accused No.1, allegations under the said Amendment Act of 2014 and the said Act of 1989 have not at all been made as against the remaining accused persons. It is also pointed out that even according to the statement of CW.1 (complainant), other than him and accused No.1, there were no one else present at the time of the alleged - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 commission of the offences and consequently, though the alleged offences are said to have taken place in the office of the school, it cannot be said that the petitioner No.1 - accused No.1 had committed the aforesaid offences within a public view and with an intention to hurl casteist abuses as against the complainant on account of his caste as required under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the said Amendment Act of 2014 and under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the said Act of 1989. 3.1 It is also submitted that essentially the dispute between petitioner No.1 - accused No.1 and respondent No.2 related to immovable property which is sought to be given a criminal colour and converted into a criminal case under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the said Amendment Act of 2014 and Section 3(2)(v-a) of the said Act of 1989 and consequently, the impugned proceedings in relation to the alleged offences are nothing but an abuse of process of law and the same deserve to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned Addl.SPP for the respondent - State would submit that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. A perusal of the material on record comprising of FIR, charge sheet, statement of witnesses etc., will indicate that apart - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 from the alleged statement of the complainant, who had made vague and bald allegations only as against petitioner No.1 - accused No.1, the statements of all the remaining witnesses do not indicate commission of the offences under Section 3(1)(r) or (s) of the said Amendment Act of 2014 and Section 3(2)(v-a) of the said Act of 1989. Further, even the statement of CW.1 will indicate that he had stated that accused No.1 had allegedly committed the offences in the office of the school and apart from CW-1 and accused No.1, there were no one else present at the time of the incident. 6. Under these circumstances, in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, in the absence of any corroborative material to support the vague and bald allegations in the statement of CW-1 (complainant) coupled with the fact that incident cannot be construed or treated as having taken place in a public view as required under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the said Amendment Act of 2014 and under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the said Act of 1989, that too only as against petitioner No.1- accused No.1, I am of the considered opinion that the continuation of the impugned proceedings against the accused for the said offences would - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 amount to abuse of process of law and the same deserve to be quashed. 7. Insofar as the other offences alleged under the IPC are concerned, it would be open for the petitioners to file a discharge application before the trial court and as such, the question of quashing the proceedings qua IPC offences would not arise at this stage. 8. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that the petition deserves to be partly allowed and the impugned proceedings to the limited/restricted extent of offences under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the said Amendment Act of 2014 and under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the said Act of 1989 deserve to be quashed and the trial Court be directed to proceed further and consider the application for discharge to be filed by the petitioners in relation to the remaining IPC offences. 9. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is partly allowed. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:3119 CRL.P No. 3772 of 2023 (ii) The impugned proceedings in Spl.Case No.63/2022 on the file of the VI Additional District and Sessions Court, Mysuru, to the limited extent for the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Ordinance Act, 2014 and under Section 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, are hereby quashed. (iii) The trial Court is directed to consider the discharge application filed by the petitioners in relation to the other offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 448, 504, 506, 427, 114, 149 of IPC and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. RB/SRL SD/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE