- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21178 CRL.P No. 13120 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13120 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI. NAGARAJ V RAYKAR S/O VINAYAK RAYKAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O H.S. ROAD, 2ND CROSS, INDIRANAGARA POST, MALEBENNUR, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577530 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY MALEBENNUR POLICE STATION, MALEBENNURU-577530 HARIHARA TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001. 2. SRI. GOVINDARAJU D.T. S/O LATE THIPPESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/A JIGALI VILLAGE, MALEBENNURU HOBLI-577530, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA R., HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. MARUTHI G.B., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2) Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21178 CRL.P No. 13120 of 2024 THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 (UNDER SECTION 528 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPECIAL CASE NO.344/2024 (CRIME NO.213/2023) REGISTERED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT - MALEBENNURU POLICE STATION, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 448, 323, 504, 506 OF IPC, UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) OF THE SC AND ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015, BY ACCEPTING THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DAVANAGERE, INITIATED ON THE COMPLAINT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the accused in Crime No.213/2023 (Spl. C. No.344/2024) is directed against the order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere, whereby the ‘B’ report submitted by respondent No.1 - Police was rejected by the Trial Court, which directed cognizance to be taken against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 448, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC') and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short, the ‘Act, 2015’) and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21178 CRL.P No. 13120 of 2024 directed issuance of summons to the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of the present petition. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2 - complainant filed the instant complaint dated 22.08.2023 against the petitioner, which was registered as an FIR in Crime No.213/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3(2)(2), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) and 3(1)(w) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Respondent No.1 - Police conducted investigation and filed a ‘B’ report and submitted the same before the Trial Court, which issued notice to respondent No.2, who filed his protest petition on 04.03.2024. Thereafter, the Trial Court recorded the sworn statement of respondent No.2 - complainant as CW.1 and examined witnesses as CWs.2 to 4 and got marked Exhibit C1 and proceeded to pass the impugned order accepting the protest petition and rejecting the ‘B’ report filed by the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21178 CRL.P No. 13120 of 2024 respondent No.1 - Police and consequently taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 448, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the Act, 2015 against the petitioner and directed issuance of summons to the petitioner, who is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. A perusal of the material on record including the impugned order will indicate that before rejecting the ‘B’ report and accepting the protest petition filed by respondent No.2, absolutely no reasons whatsoever are assigned by the Trial Court except stating that the sworn statement of the complainant indicates prima facie material to proceed against the petitioner and proper investigation had not been done by the respondent No.1 – Police. In the other words, the impugned order does not disclose any application of mind and on the other hand, the same is an unreasoned, cryptic, non-speaking and laconic order without assigning any cogent or valid reasons as to why the ‘B’ report was being rejected and the protest petition was being accepted and consequently, I am of the view that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court rejecting the ‘B’ report and accepting the protest petition deserves to be set aside and the matter is to be remitted - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21178 CRL.P No. 13120 of 2024 back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 5. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby partly allowed; (ii) The impugned order dated 17.09.2024 passed by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere, in Crime No.213/2023 (Spl.C No.344/2024), is hereby set aside; (iii) The matter is remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law bearing in mind the observations made in this order; (iv) The Trial Court is directed to reconsider the 'B' report and protest petition and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In view of disposal of this petition, I.A. No.1/2024 for stay does not arise for consideration and the same stands dismissed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SMA/SRL/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25