- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22335 CRL.P No. 14377 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14377 OF 2024 BETWEEN: FORBES TECHNOLOGY, NO.43, RESIDENCY ROAD, ASHOK NAGAR, SHANTALA NAGAR, BENGALURU, REPRESENTD BY PROPPRIETOR RAMYA, W/O ANANDAKUMARK K., AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, NO.24 K 68/4, CHUNCHAGHATTA MAIN ROAD, BEERESHWARA NAGAR, KONANAKUNTE, BANGALORE PIN CODE– 560 062. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJU C.N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY BAGALAGUNTE POLICE, BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. RAJESAB K., S/O KHAJESAB GANJIGATTI, Digitally signed by CHAITHRA P Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22335 CRL.P No. 14377 of 2024 AGEED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.C-502, SALARPURIA SATTVA, LORENS HYDES, HESARAGATTA A MAIN ROAD, BENGALORE PIN CODE– 560 057. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R-1; R-2 IS SERVED AND UN-REPRESENTED) *** THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CRIME NO.465/2024 OF BAGALAGUNTE POLICE BENGALURU ON THE FILE OF XXXI A.C.J.M AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 66(D), 66(C) OF I.T. ACT AND FOR THE OFFENCE P/U SECTION 318(4) OF BNS BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS CRL.P., COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following relief: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22335 CRL.P No. 14377 of 2024 "WHEREFORE the petitioner above named most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the FIR against the petitioner in Crime No.465/2024 of Bagalagunte Police Bengaluru on the file of XXXI A.C.J.M at Bengaluru for the offence p/u/s 66(d), 66(c) of I.T. Act and for the offence p/u Section 318(4) of BNS by allowing this petition, in the interest of justice." 2. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State and perused the records. Respondent No.2 is served and un-represented. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondent No.2 filed the instant complaint on 12.12.2024 which was registered as FIR in Crime No.465/2024 against the petitioner, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 318 of BNS, 2023. 4. According to the second respondent/complainant, he contacted the petitioner on the premise that the petitioner was an authorized service provider/Centre of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22335 CRL.P No. 14377 of 2024 Forbes AO Smith Company and the technician Girish of Ratna Enterprises sent by the petitioner carried out service of the Water Purifier in the residence of respondent No.2, who subsequently came to know that the petitioner was not an authorized service centre and consequently, the second respondent incurred loss in a sum of `13,000/- and filed the instant complaint, making the aforesaid allegations against the petitioner. 5. In this context, the learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the registration Certificate, GST Certificate, bill, vide Annexures C, D and E, in order to point out that the said document would establish that the petitioner was an authorized service centre of M/s. AO Smith Company from whom the respondent No.2 purchased the subject Water Purifier. In addition thereto, the learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo along with a receipt for having returned `13,000/- back to the second respondent on 23.12.2024. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22335 CRL.P No. 14377 of 2024 6. Under these circumstances, having regard to the fact that the entire expenses incurred by the second respondent has been returned back to him by the petitioner on 23.12.2024 itself coupled with the fact that the petitioner actually possesses and holds a valid registration certificate, GST Certificate and bill, all of which clearly establish that he was the authorised service provider/centre of M/s. AO Smith Company, the manufacturer of Water Purifier, I am of the considered opinion that the continuation of the impugned proceedings qua the petitioner deserves to be quashed. 7. In the result petition, I pass the following: ORDER i. The Criminal Petition is hereby allowed; ii. The complaint/FIR in Crime No.465/2024 of Bagalagunte Police Station, Bengaluru, pending on the file of the XXXI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City, for the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22335 CRL.P No. 14377 of 2024 offences punishable under Sections 66(D) and 66(C) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023, qua petitioner herein/accused, is hereby quashed. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23