SHRI. MARADEPPA S/O NAGAPPA HALLI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.P/100510/2022 · 2025-02-17
Hemant Chandangoudar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3489 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3489 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3190 CRL.P No. 100510 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100510 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1.
SHRI. MARADEPPA S/O. NAGAPPA HALLI AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MURADI, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118.
2.
SHRI. DEVAPPA S/O. SHANKRAPPA HANAKANAHALLI, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHIKKAWADATTI, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118.
3.
SHRI. NAGARAJA S/O. MALLAPPA HANAKANAHALLI, AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHIKKAWADATTI, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118.
4.
SMT. YALLAVVA W/O. NAGAPPA HALLI AGE. 68 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MURADI, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118.
5.
SMT. MALLAVVA @ MALLAMMA W/O. BHARMAPPA SANAKAL, AGE. 61 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BIDNAL, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118.
6.
SMT. SHANTAVVA W/O. BHARMAPPA HALLI AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MURADI, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118.
B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.20 16:40:09 +0530
- 2 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3190 CRL.P No. 100510 of 2022
7.
SMT. HANAMAVVA W/O. DEVAPPA HANAKANAHALLI, AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. MURADI, TQ. MUNDARAGI, DIST. GADAG-582118. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. T.R.PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS POLICE INSPECTOR OF MUNDARAGI P.S, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P.
HIGH COURT OF BUILDING, DHARWAD.
2.
SRI. UMESH S/O. SANGAPPA HANAKANAHALLI AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. FORMER, R/O. A.P.M.C. HAMALAR COLONY, GADAG-582101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;
SMT. BHAGYASHREE N.BIKKANNAVAR, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO, QUASH THE COGNIZANCE TAKEN FOR THE OFFENCES PINISHABLE U/S 143, 147, 323, 447, 341, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MUNDARGI, IN CC NO.753/2021 (ARISING OUT OF MUNDARGI P.S. CRIME NO.69/2021) DATED 25.11.2021 AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO.753/2021 (ARISING OUT OF MUNDARGI P.S. CRIME NO.69/2021) FILED AGAINST THESE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 143, 147, 323, 447, 341, 504, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC, IN SO FAR THE PETITIONERS HEREIN/ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NOS.1 TO 7 RESPECTIVELY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
- 3 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3190 CRL.P No. 100510 of 2022
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners, who have been charged with offences under Sections 143, 147, 323, 447, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the IPC, seek relief before the Court.
2. The prosecution alleges that there is an ongoing dispute concerning land bearing Survey No. 57 (6 acres 5 guntas), with a suit (O.S.No.109/2016) pending. On 18.05.2021, while the complainant was present on the land, the petitioners allegedly arrived on a motorcycle, criminally trespassed, abused and threatened the complainant, and accused No.1 allegedly assaulted the complainant, causing simple injuries.
3. The parties are involved in a partition suit related to the land, where the complainant is a defendant. The issue of lawful possession of the land is to be determined by the civil court. The allegations against the petitioners are general, with no specific details on how they allegedly abused or threatened the complainant. The only specific allegation of assault is against accused No.1, but the prosecution has failed to provide medical evidence or a wound certificate to confirm that the complainant sustained injuries from the alleged assault. This suggests that the FIR was filed as an afterthought, possibly to prevent the petitioners from asserting their rights in the ongoing civil suit, with ulterior motives.
4. Given that the dispute is civil in nature, continuing the criminal proceedings would constitute an abuse of process of law.
- 4 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:3190 CRL.P No. 100510 of 2022
ORDER i. Accordingly, petition is allowed. ii. The impugned proceeding in C.C.No.753/2021 on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC at Mundargi is hereby quashed.
Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE
TIN Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 80