- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23593 CRL.P No. 6061 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6061 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. TANUJA MADHAV, W/O RAVIRAJ CHEDGA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT BRIGADE OMEGA, FALT NO.A306, SEGMENT ONE, 80TH ROAD, OPP. TURUHALLI FOREST BHARAT HOUSING SOCIETY LAYOUT, SUBRAMANYAPURA, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA-560062. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. ARCHANA K.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY PUTTENHALLI POLICE STATION PUTTENAHALLI SUBRMANYAPURA SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU-560078 REPRESENTED BY SPP. HIGH COURT BUILDING. 2. P. KRISHNA RAJ CHEDGA S/O SUBBARAYA CHEDGA, AGED 78 YEARS, PRUTHVI CLASSIC, 19TH CROSS, 20TH ‘A’ MAIN, SMS LAYOUT, J.P. NAGAR, 5TH PHASE, BENGALURU-560078. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R-1; SRI AJAY KADKOL, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) Digitally signed by DHAKSHAYINI R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23593 CRL.P No. 6061 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE HON’BLE BEFORE THE COURT OF XXX ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU DATED 28.03.2023 IN C.C.NO.7825/2023 TAKING COGNIZANCE OF OFFENCE P/U/S 380 AND 409 OF IPC. 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 In this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned order dated 28.03.2023 passed in C.C. No.7825/2023 by the learned Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence punishable against the petitioner under Section 380 and 409 of the IPC and for other reliefs. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for the State and the learned counsel for the respondent. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that petitioner is the wife of Raviraj Chedga, whose father is none other than the respondent No.2 – defecto complainant, who filed a private complaint in PCR No.13623/2022 dated 16.08.2022 against the petitioner. In pursuance of the same, the learned Magistrate - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23593 CRL.P No. 6061 of 2024 passed an order dated 03.09.2022 directing investigation pursuant to which the police authorities have registered the impugned FIR in Crime No.240/2022 which culminated in the impugned charge sheet which is currently pending in CC No.7825/2023 whereby the trial Court took cognizance against the petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 380 and 409 of IPC. In this context, it would be necessary to extract the impugned order passed by the trial Court taking cognizance, which reads as under: 28.03.2023 Charge sheet submitted by PI Puttenahalli P.S. In Cr No.240/2023 for the alleged offence under Section 380 and 409 IPC. Accused No.1 and 2 are not obtained Court bail. Original FIR/complaint are enclosed. Charge sheet and connected papers are checked, copies of charge sheet here with enclosed. Prays for an order to take the cognizance for the above offenses against the accused. For orders Perused the charge sheet, its enclosures and other materials on record. There are prima facie materials to proceed against the accused shown in the charge sheet. Hence cognizance taken the alleged offence and proceed to pass the following. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23593 CRL.P No. 6061 of 2024 ORDER Register the case against the accused in Register No.III for the alleged offence. Issue summons to the Accused No.1 and 2 : Call on by 22.05.2023.” 4. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the same smacks of complete non application of mind inasmuch as impugned order taking cognizance is a cryptic, lethargic, non speaking and unreasoned order, without assigning valid or cogent reason as to why the charge sheet and the material are to be accepted and cognizance has to be taken as held by the coordinate bench of this Court in various judgments including the judgment of the coordinate bench of this Court in the case of Arjun Ajaneya Reddy and Others vs. State of Karnataka and Another (Crl.P.No.9078/2024 dated 27.09.2024). If the impugned order is examined bearing in mind the principles enunciated in the aforesaid judgment, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order showing absolutely no application of mind deserves to be quashed and the matter has to be remitted back to the trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:23593 CRL.P No. 6061 of 2024 28.03.2023 is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law at the stage of taking cognizance. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE YKL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7