- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION No. 6423 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. G YATHISH @ RAVI S/O LATE GANGARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT IDAGURU VILLAGE, C S PURA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 213. 2. JABIULLA S/O LATE ABDUL SATTAR SAAB AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT IDAGURU VILLAGE, C S PURA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT. 3. SRINIVASA S/O LATE VENKATANANDAYYA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT IDAGURU VILLAGE, C S PURA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT. 4. RAMAKRISHNA S/O LATE TIRUMALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT IDAGURU VILLAGE, C S PURA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT. 5. MAHESH @ MAHESH KUMAR S/O LATE THIMMARAJU AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT IDAGURU VILLAGE, C S PURA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 213. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI M SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHANDRASHEKARPURA P .S. REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. JYOTHI W/O CHELUVEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT IDAGURU VILLAGE, C.S.PURA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 213. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1 SRI RAVIKUMARA B R AND SRI SHARANDEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 Cr.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 307 OF IPC IN S.C.No. 102/2022 ORIGINATED FROM CR.No.15/2021 OF CHANDRASHEKARAPURA P.S., REGISTERED FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIIONS 143, 144, 148, 201, 212, 323, 354, 307, 504 R/W 149 OF IPC, WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE I ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT TUMAKURU. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is preferred by the petitioners with a specific prayer to quash the proceedings insofar as Section 307 of IPC is concerned. 2. Charge sheet is filed against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 201, 212, 323, 354, 307, 504, read with Section 149 IPC. 3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that even accepting the entire allegations and the charge sheet materials, the ingredients of Section 307 of IPC are not made out and therefore, filing of charge sheet for the said offense is wholly untenable. He contended that according to the prosecution, the injured i.e., C.W.2, has sustained a superficial injury measuring 2 X 1 cm on his abdomen and at no stretch of imagination it can be said that the said injury was caused to him by the accused with an intention to commit his murder. It is his further contention that abdomen is not a vital part of the body and no motive is forthcoming to commit murder and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 even the weapon alleged to have been used was not seized. He therefore, contended that filing of charge sheet insofar as Section 307 of IPC is liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, learned HCGP has contended that there is previous enmity between C.W.2 and accused No. 1 and the statement of the witnesses show that during a procession there was a quarrel and accused No. 1, all of a sudden, took out a knife and stabbed on the abdomen of C.W.2 which is a vital part of the body. She therefore contended that with an intention to do away with the life of C.W.2, accused No. 1 stabbed him on his vital part of the body with a knife, which is a dangerous weapon and all the accused have shared a common object to commit the offence. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 relied on a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Harjeet Singh and another, reported in AIR 2019 SCC 1120 and stressed on head note A of the said judgment wherein it is held that there is no requirement for the injury to be on the vital part of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 body, merely causing hurt is sufficient to attract Section 307 of IPC. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that in the said case, 4 injuries were inflicted to the injured with a knife and in that context, the Apex Court has held that mere causing of hurt with intention or knowledge of causing death is sufficient to attract Section 307 IPC. He contended that said judgment is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 7. The averments in the complaint lodged by one Jyoti wife of Chaluvegowda goes to show that during a village festival, on 02.04.2021 at about 10.30 pm, when a procession took place, accused No. 1 – Yathish @ Ravi bin late Gangaramaiah picked up a quarrel and assaulted the complainant and snatched the gold mangalya chain and threw it. When her brother Ananda I.J. – C.W.2 tried to intervene, the said accused removed a knife from his pocket and stabbed on his abdomen and caused injury, thereafter the other accused along with accused No. 1 assaulted the complainant and others with hands and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 kicked them etc. As per prosecution, injured was admitted and treated at Adi Chunchangiri Hospital. 8. It is not in dispute that the weapon of offence was not seized in this case. However, while filing charge sheet materials are placed to show that C.W.2 sustained certain injuries on his abdomen, though the said injury is simple in nature. The use of weapon and inflicting injury to the abdomen of C.W.2 is attributed against accused No. 1. Whether there was intention on the part of accused to do away with the life of C.W.2 etc., is a matter which has to be established in due course. 9. As per prosecution, there was some dispute between accused No. 1 and C.W.2 in connection with a Gram Panchayat election which took place in the year 2020 and accused No. 1 was under the impression that he lost the election because of C.W.2. It is too premature to say at this stage that there was no intention on the part of accused No. 1 to take away the life of C.W.2. The case is now committed to the Sessions Court. The petitioners are at liberty to file an application seeking discharge before - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16936 CRL.P No. 6423 of 2023 the trial Court if charges are not already framed. If any such application is filed, the trial Court is required to dispose of the same, in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made herein. 10. With the above observations, petition is dismissed. LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29 Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE