- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:248 CRL.P No. 1543 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1543 OF 2019 BETWEEN: B.R. SIDDARAMU S/O R. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT BETTAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MANDIGERE POST, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISHNUMURTHY, ADVOCATE (AB)) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NELAMANGALA RURAL P.S. R/P BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 01. 2. SUNITHA .C., MAJOR, WORKING AS PDO GOLLAHALLI GRAMA PANCHAYATH KASABA HOBLI NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKAT SATHYANARAYAN, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. M.S. DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.5/2019 OF NELAMANGALA RURAL POLICE STATION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT FOR AN OFFENCE U/S.353, Digitally signed by SWAPNA V Location: high court of karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:248 CRL.P No. 1543 of 2019 504, 506 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL AND JMFC (JR.DN), NELAMANGALA. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR HEARING - INTERLOCUTORY APPLN, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being the accused is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in Cr.No.5/2019 of Nelamangala Rural Police Station, on the file of the Prl.Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC Court, Nelamangala, for the offence punishable under Sections 353, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). 2. Brief facts of the case are that, respondent No.2 as informant filed the first information against the petitioner alleging commission of the offence as stated above. It is the specific contention of the informant that she is a Government servant working as PDO in Gollahalli Gram Panchayath. On 11.01.2019, at 11.00 am., a meeting was convened by the Chair Person to discuss about the issues in the village. Respondent No.2 being the PDO, was present in the meeting. The accused being the Vice President along with other accused - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:248 CRL.P No. 1543 of 2019 was also present. The petitioner picked up quarrel with the informant and other members, abused them in filthy language and criminally intimidated her. He also tried to assault the informant and prevented her from discharging her official duty. Therefore, she requested the police to register the case and to initiate legal action. Accordingly, the police have registered the case and took up investigation. The petitioner being the accused is before this Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him. The interim order of stay was granted and therefore, it is stated that the investigation was not undertaken. 3. Inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. No representation. Hence, his argument is taken as nil. Heard Sri. Venkat Sathyanarayan, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. M.S.Devaraju, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the materials on record. 4. In view of the contentions urged by the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:248 CRL.P No. 1543 of 2019 “Whether the Petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him?" My answer to the above point is in ‘negative’ for the following: R E A S O N S 5. Respondent No.2 being the informant filed the first information making specific allegations against the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the informant is working as PDO in Gram Panchayath and she explained the high handed acts of the petitioner in the Gram Panchayath when the meeting was convened. The FIR came to be registered on 12.01.2019 and the petition came to be filed on 25.02.2019. The petitioner was successful in getting interim order of stay of further proceedings, as a result of which, no investigation was undertaken. When serious allegations are made against the petitioner by a Government Servant, who is a lady, I do not find any ground for quashing the criminal proceedings. It is a fit case for investigation and to file the final report. Since there is no merits in the petition, I answer the above point in the negative and proceed to pass the following. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:248 CRL.P No. 1543 of 2019 ORDER The petition is dismissed. In view of the disposal of the main petition, pending IA stands disposed of. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE BH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 22