- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8178 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. GOVINDA, SON OF LATE GOVINDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, RESIDING AT ASHA NURSERY GARDEN, 5TH CROSS, JAYANGARA 1ST BLOCK, BANGALORE - 560 011 2. SHRI. PRASANNA KUMAR SHETTY SON OF LATE SHRI. MANJAIAH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.101/3, DODDAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, BELLANDURU EAST, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE - 560 103. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VACHAN H.U., ADVOCATE FOR SMT. KAVITHA DAMODARAN, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER NO.2 VIDE ORDER DATED 11.03.2025, PETITIONER NO.1 DELETED) AND: 1. STATE BY HEBBAGODI POLICE STATION ANEKAL SUB DIVISION, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 106, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. SMT. MANJULA M. W/O. LATE KAVERAPPA, AVALAHALLI VILLAGE, HUSKUR POST, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE - 562 106 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. SRIKANTH N.V., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S. 482 OF CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO a) QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMPLAINT IN CR.NO.398/2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 - HEBBAGODI POLICE STATION BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND J.M.F.C., ANEKAL, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT (ANNEXURE-A) U/S 143, 147, 148, 120B, 341, 323, 506, 427 R/W 149 OF IPC AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioners are seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No.398/2023 registered at Hebbagodi Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offence punishable under Sections 143, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 147, 148, 120-B, 341, 323, 506, 427 read with Section 149 of IPC. 2. Heard both sides and perused the material on record. 3. The first informant by name Smt. Manjula W/o. Munikaverappa set the law into motion alleging that the accused/petitioners brought about 40 persons to the land bearing survey No.28 of Avalahali village, measuring about 38 and ½ acres, and posed threat to the family members etc. It is averred in the complaint that the complainant is in possession and cultivation of the said land for the past 40 years. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in respect of the property in question, both petitioner No.1 as well as the complainant have filed suit and the claim of the complainant that the said property belongs to her is entirely false as the petitioners have the required documents to show that they are the owners of the property. Further, it is contended that prior to lodging of the present complaint against petitioners, there were two complaints - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 lodged against the complainant which was registered as NCR and no FIR was registered and only as a counter blast, the instant complaint is lodged against petitioners. He contended that the dispute is purely civil in nature which has been given a texture of criminal offence to harass the petitioners. 5. The learned counsel would also contend that in respect of the very same incident alleged to have taken place on 05.08.2023 at about 07:30 a.m., one more complaint has been lodged by respondent No.2 herein on the basis of which, the police have registered a case in Crime No.408/2023 against petitioners and 4 others and therefore, the said case registered amounts to second FIR registered in respect of the very same incident and therefore, the same is not maintainable. 6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has contended that in respect of the incident which took place on 05.08.2023, complaint has been lodged against second respondent and six others by one Mohan. A. V., alleged care taker of the petitioners in respect of the property in question. He contended that in both the FIRs, investigation is pending and therefore, the impugned FIR cannot be quashed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 7. Learned High Court Government Pleader has contended that the FIR in Crime No.398/2023 and 401/2023 registered at Hebgagodi Police Station, arise out of a case and counter case and the investigation is pending. 8. I have perused the averments made by respondent No.2 in Crime No.398/2023 of Hebbgagodi Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Section 143, 147, 148, 120-B, 341, 323, 506, 427 read with Section 149 of IPC. It is alleged that the petitioners herein in order to grab the land, which was being cultivated by her for the past 40 years, brought several rowdies and destroyed the crops with the help of JCB and then threatened her family members etc. 9. In Crime No.401/2023 of Hebbagodi Police Staiton, which is registered against respondent No.2 and six others on a complaint lodged by one Mohan. A. V., said to be the care taker of petitioners' property, it is alleged that the said land in Survey No.28 is in the name of petitioner No.1, Govinda and on 05.08.2023 at about 07:30 a.m., they trespassed into the property, prevented the coolie workers from working in the land, abused them etc. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 10. It appears that the dispute is with regard to the property in question situated in Survey No.28 of Avalahalli village. It is not in dispute that both the parties have filed civil suits against each other. It is submitted that O.S.No.559/2023 filed by the petitioner No.1 seeking injunction and O.S.No.704/2023 filed by the respondent No.2 and others seeking declaration and injunction are pending before the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal. 11. No observation can be made regarding ownership/rights of the property in the present petition, seeking quashing of the proceedings. Pendency of the civil case between the parties itself is not a ground to hold that the entire allegations are false and a civil dispute has been given a colour of criminal offence. Since both the parties have filed complaints against each other and FIR's having been registered, it is for the police to conduct proper investigation and to file appropriate report. 12. In so far as the contention of the learned counsel that in respect of the very same incident, there is one more complaint lodged by respondent No.2 herein and the police have registered second FIR in Crime No.408/2023, petitioners - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16674 CRL.P No. 8178 of 2023 have challenged the same in Crl.P.No.7487/2023. The maintainability of the said FIR has to be decided in the said petition. 13. For the aforementioned reasons, the following: ORDER i) Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC,HB CT-SG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27