G R SHIVANNA v. THE STATE BY HOLALKERE POLICE STATION
CRL.P/9471/2022 · 2025-03-14
Mohammad Nawaz
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30769 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30769 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10748 CRL.P No. 9471 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 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9471 OF 2022 482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS) BETWEEN:
G.R. SHIVANNA, S/O G.K. RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS LECTURER, GIRLS GOVT.
PRE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, CHITRADURGA - 577 501.
RESIDING AT:
ASAVA LAYOUT, 5TH WARD, HOLALKERE TOWN, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 511. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1.
THE STATE BY HOLALKERE POLICE STATION, HOLALKERE, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE - 560 001.
2.
M.K. PRABHULINGAIAH, S/O LATE KARIBASAVAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, TEACHER, RESIDING AT SHIVANANDA HIGH SCHOOL, SHIVANAPADA VILLAGE, KORATIGERE POST, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 501. Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10748 CRL.P No. 9471 of 2022 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 406, 420 OF IPC ON THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN CR.NO.316/2016 IN C.C.NO.692/2018 AND NEWLY NUMBERED AS C.C.NO.709/2021, PENDING BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., HOLALKERE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for petitioner, learned High Court Government Pleader for the State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the materials on record.
2. Petitioner is seeking to quash the charge sheet filed against him for the offence punishable under Section 406 and 420 of IPC.
3. The allegations are that, petitioner / accused sold a site bearing reg.No.1900/E/11 measuring 30 x 53 feet to the complainant on 08.05.2013 vide registered sale deed executed in the Office of Sub-Registrar, Holalkere and thereafter, with an
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10748 CRL.P No. 9471 of 2022 intention to cheat the complainant, constructed a house in the said property by means of a license obtained from Holalkere Town Panchayat.
4.
Learned counsel for petitioner would contend that the ingredients of the offences alleged are not made out as the allegation that the petitioner has committed criminal breach of trust is misconceived since, there was no entrustment of property. He contended that the complainant should establish that the accused has dishonestly misappropriated or converted the property to his own use which was entrusted to him and in the present case, such ingredients are not forthcoming and moreover there is suit pending between the parties. He has therefore, sought to quash the entire proceedings initiated against the petitioner.
5. A perusal of the complaint averments and the charge sheet allegations goes to show that even prior to selling the property in question and executing the sale deed, the accused had obtained a license from the Town Mincipal council. After the property was sold, he constructed a house in the said property on the strength of the said license. Pendency of the
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC:10748 CRL.P No. 9471 of 2022 suit filed by the complainant in O.S.No.18/2017, seeking possession of the property itself is not a ground to hold that the matter is purely civil in nature. In view of the said suit seeking possession of the property, fact remains that after the property in question was sold to the complainant, accused constructed the house and continued to be in possession of the said property. Therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that the ingredients for the offences alleged are not made out.
6. Complaint in this case was lodged on 03.09.2016. The charge sheet is dated 26.10.2016. This petition for quashing is filed in the year 2022. It is submitted by the
learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the trial is in progress. This Court finds no merit in the present petition. Petition is dismissed. I.A.No.1/2022 is dismissed. Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE LDC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22