- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10749 WP No. 15537 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ WRIT PETITION NO. 15537 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. RAMESH S/O LT. HANUMANTAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 2. SRI. AKSHAY KUMAR, S/O LATE SHIVARAM, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT: AVALAHALLI VILLAGE UTTRAHALLI HOBLI BYATARAYANAUPRA BENGALURU - 560 026. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. UMESH R.S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BYATARAYANAPURA POLICE STATION, BYATRAYANAPURA, MYSURU ROAD BENGALURU - 560 026, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATION HOUSE OFFICER. 2. SMT. N. HEMALATHA, W/O G.S. HARIN KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT 786, 7TH MAIN, SRINAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 050. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K.B.K. SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10749 WP No. 15537 of 2022 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER COMPLAINT DATED 16.05.2022 VIDE ANNX-H AND THE FIR REGISTERED BY THE R-1 POLICE IN CRL.NO.125/2022, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 31ST ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE COURT, BENGALURU VIDE ANNX-J. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Petitioners have sought to quash the complaint dated 16.05.2022 and the consequent FIR registered in Crime No.125/2022 at Byatarayanapura Police Station for offences punishable under section 448, 427, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Heard both sides and perused the material on record. 3. It is alleged that on 13.05.2022 between 12:00 hours - 01:00 p.m., accused have trespassed into the property of the complainant, picked up quarrel with her, pushed the wall which was being constructed and thereby caused loss to her. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10749 WP No. 15537 of 2022 Further, they threatened the complainant saying that they will bring a bulldozer and demolish the wall which was being constructed by the complainant. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that the dispute is purely civil in nature, which has been given a colour of criminal offence. He contended that a suit was filed by one Smt. Sunitha in O.S.No.3997/2021 in respect of the property in question and there was an interim order directing the parties to maintain status-quo with regard to ‘B’ schedule property. The complainant, Hemalatha filed MFA.No.5866/2021 seeking modification of the interim order and this Court disposed of the appeal in view of the undertaking given that she will not erect/undertake putting up of construction even an inch of the property encroaching on 6 feet wide passage as showed in the sketch map produced in the petition and she will confine the construction within her property. 5. Learned counsel has contended that after an inordinate delay of 2 days, petitioners are falsely implicated in view of the civil dispute existing between the parties. He - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10749 WP No. 15537 of 2022 contended that allegations in the complaint are all false and tainted with malafide intention and it is a counter blast to the suit and other proceedings initiated by second petitioner’s mother. 6. It is contended by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the construction was being done in the property belonging to the complainant as per the undertaking given before this Court in MFA.No.5866/2021 disposed on 04.01.2022. However, on the date of incident i.e., on 13.05.2022 these petitioners namely the brother and son of the plaintiff in O.S.No.3997/2021 trespassed into the property and not only knocked down the wall, but even threatened the complainant. He contended that the ingredients of the offences alleged are clearly made out and sought to dismiss the petition. 7. Even though there is a civil dispute pending between the parties, at this stage it is too premature to say that no offence was committed as alleged in the complaint. According to complainant she was constructing the wall lawfully in her property, as per the undertaking given before this Court. Hence, the disputed fact cannot be gone into by this Court - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10749 WP No. 15537 of 2022 while exercising its inherent jurisdiction. It is the duty of the police to investigate into the allegation and file an appropriate report. It is needless to say that right of the parties with regard to the property in question have to be decided by the Civil Court. However, criminal offence alleged to have been committed is a matter which has to be investigated into. Hence, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, petition is dismissed. Petitioners are at liberty to challenge the final report, if filed against them. I.A.No.1/2023 is disposed of. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13