- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15551 CRL.P No. 4086 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4086 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. K. T. THOMAS S/O LATE K M THOMAS AGED ABOUT 95 YEARS R/AT NO 17, BORE BANK ROAD, BENSON TOWN BENGALURU - 560046 (AS PROVIDED IN THE AADHAR CARD) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJATH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOTHANUR P S REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560001. 2. SRINIVAS M S/O LATE SRI MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NO 445 C, MARIYAPPA LAYOUT AVALAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 077. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; R2-SERVED) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CR.NO.154/2024 DATED 05.04.2024 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 KOTHANUR P.S. FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 417,420,447,465,468,470,471,504,506 OF IPC Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15551 CRL.P No. 4086 of 2024 PENDING BEFORE THE LEAREND XXIX A.C.M.M MAYO HALL AT BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner (accused No.1), who challenges the registration of FIR for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 420, 447, 465, 468, 470, 471, 504, and 506 of IPC, is before this Court seeking relief. 2. Respondent No.2 lodged the FIR stating that he is the owner of the subject land. He had filed an application under Section 5 of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, “the Act, 1978”) seeking resumption of the land, contending that the subject property was conveyed to the petitioner without obtaining prior permission from the competent authority under Section 4(2) of the Act, 1978. The petition was dismissed by the Assistant Commissioner, and the same was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner, prompting respondent No.2 and others to approach this Court. This Court directed the parties to maintain status quo. During the subsistence of the status quo order, the petitioner is alleged to have fraudulently obtained conversion of the land for non- - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15551 CRL.P No. 4086 of 2024 agricultural purposes and thereafter criminally trespassed onto the subject land, abusing and threatening respondent No.2 with dire consequences. 3. Respondent No.2, though served with notice, has neither appeared before the Court in person nor through a counsel and is placed ex parte. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. Admittedly, respondent No.2 conveyed the subject land to the petitioner through a registered sale deed, and the application for resumption of the land is presently pending before this Court. After dismissal of the petition and the appeal filed by respondent No.2 under Section 5(1) of the Act, 1978, the petitioner obtained conversion of the land for non-agricultural use from the competent authority. 6. The alleged incident of criminal trespass by the petitioner is said to have taken place during the subsistence of the status quo order passed by this Court on 13.04.2022. The dispute between the parties is also pending before this Court and in O.S. No.2502/2022, wherein the application filed by respondent No.2 for grant of temporary injunction has been rejected. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15551 CRL.P No. 4086 of 2024 7. The question of lawful possession of the subject land is under consideration before this Court and the jurisdictional civil court. Therefore, the criminal court cannot adjudicate upon the issue of lawful possession claimed by respondent No.2. The allegations made against the petitioner appear to have been made with a view to wreak vengeance and with a vindictive intent to pressurize the petitioner into a settlement. The dispute between the parties is essentially civil in nature, though given a criminal color. In such circumstances, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned FIR in Crime No.154/2024 registered by the Kothanur Police Station, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52