- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14358 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. PUNEETH PRUTHY S/O BHANSILAL AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.2051 PRESTIGE WEST WOOD APRATMENTS, GOPALPRUA MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU-560 023. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. T PRAKASH.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MAGADI ROAD POLICE STATION REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. 2. SRI. PRABHAKARA NAIK S/O GANGADHAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.3211 PRESTIGE WEST WOOD GOPALPURA, BINNYPET BENGLAURU-560 023. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. PRABHAKAR NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.60/2024 (CR.NO.195/2023) OF MAGADI ROAD P.S. FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 341, 323 OF IPC VIDE ANNXUERE-C PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 24TH A.C.M.M BENGALURU CITY SO FAR AS THIS PETITIONER /ACCUSED IS CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the accused seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in C.C.No.60/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution is as under: Respondent No.2, the de facto complainant, lodged a complaint on 11.07.2023 in respect of an incident said to have occurred on 15.06.2023 at about 6:30 p.m. near the Club House at Prestige West Wood Apartments. The substance of the complaint is that while the complainant was seated in the common walking area, the petitioner/accused allegedly intercepted him and physically - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 assaulted him. On this basis, Crime No.195/2023 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 of the IPC. 3. After completing the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed a charge sheet for the aforesaid offences. The present petition is filed challenging the proceedings on the ground that the complaint was lodged after an inordinate delay and as a counterblast to a complaint lodged by the petitioner’s wife. The petitioner asserts that the de facto complainant is in the habit of quarrelling with the security personnel, housekeeping staff, and other residents, and abusing them in filthy language. Reliance is placed on the statements of CWs.4 to 9 recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., who, according to the prosecution, are eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. The petitioner contends that these witnesses have categorically stated that it was the complainant who provoked the quarrel, and that he had released his dog, causing fear among ladies and children. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 It is further alleged that when the petitioner’s wife, Rupali, who is a member of the apartment association, questioned the complainant, he abused her in vulgar terms, accusing her of immoral activities, which led to an exchange of words. Except for this altercation, the petitioner submits, there was no incident amounting to physical assault. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating these grounds, submits that even if the entire charge sheet is accepted as true, the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. disclose no material supporting the commission of any offence by the petitioner. It is urged that, in the absence of incriminating evidence, the Investigating Officer ought to have submitted a ‘B’ report rather than filing a charge sheet. It is therefore contended that the continuation of the proceedings is an abuse of the process of law, and the same deserves to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 5. Per contra, the de facto complainant, appearing as party-in-person and having filed written submissions, opposes the petition. He submits that the petitioner’s wife, who is one of the female directors of the apartment association, fabricated a false counter-complaint to dilute the gravity of the injuries inflicted on him on the date of the incident. According to him, he sustained serious injuries as a result of an assault orchestrated by the petitioner and certain members of the executive committee in collusion with the developers of the Prestige Group. He claims that due to the said injuries, he had to obtain emergency treatment at K.C. General Hospital late at night. He further alleges that some of the prosecution witnesses were planted and insists they should be subjected to a polygraph examination. He also contends that Dr. Pankaja, the CMO of K.C.General Hospital, was influenced by the apartment executive committee, which delayed the release of his MLC report by over 15 days. He states that only after obtaining the MLC did he submit a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 written complaint on 08.07.2023, as the police had initially declined to accept his complaint on 15.06.2023. He further avers that the scuffle with the executive members within the apartment premises resulted in an eye injury leading to 50% permanent disability. He has placed reliance on medical records produced with I.A. No.1/2025 in support of his contentions. 6. Learned HCGP, supporting the prosecution, submits that the Investigating Officer, having found sufficient material, has rightly filed the charge sheet. Therefore, it is argued that this is not a fit case for the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as the veracity of the materials has to be tested during trial. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the de facto complainant appearing in person, and the learned HCGP. I have also carefully perused the charge sheet and other records produced in the case. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 8. Petitioner is charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of IPC. This Court deems it fit to extract the gist of the complaint which reads as under: "ೆಂಗಳರು ನಗರದ ಾಗ ರೆ ೕ ಾಾ ಸರಹದು, ೖಸೂರು ೕಷ ರೆ, ಪ"#$ೕ% 'ೆ$ ವ)* ಅ,ಾಟ.ಂ/ ನ0 12ಾಂಕ:-15.06.2023 ರಂದು ಸಂ4ೆ 06- 30 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ಾ7-1 ರವರು ಕ08 9ೌ ಬ< ಇರುವ >ಾಮ 'ಾ@ಂA ಏCDಾದ0 ಕು<ತು>ೊಂರು'ಾ6ೆF ಅ06ೆ ಬಂದ ಎ-1 ಆIೋJಯು ತನL 9ೆಂಡNDಾದ ಾ7-4 ರವರ ಬ6ೆF ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 ಸುOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕಯ, ಅನPೕಕೃತ ಕೃತRಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು ಸುಳST ಅಪಪ"Uಾರ ಾಡುNೕಯ ಎಂದು >ೇಳSNVಾಗ ಾ7-1 ರವರು ಏನು ಾತ2ಾಡVೇ 9ೋಗುNVಾಗ ಎ-1 ಆIೋJಯು ಾ7-1 ರವರನುL ತWೆದು Xದು>ೊಂಡು ಏ>ಾಏ@ >ೈಗ<ಂದ 9ೊWೆದು 2ೋವ)ಂಟು ಾರುವ)ದು ಾYZ[ಾರಗ<ಂದ 9ಾಗೂ ಾ7Vಾರರ 9ೇ<>ೆಗ<ಂದ N<ದು ಬಂ1ರುತVೆ. ಆದCಂದ ಎ-1 ಆIೋJಯ ರುದ] ಕಲಂ 341, 323 ಐJ# Cೕ`ಾR ಈ VೋbಾIೋಪಣ ಪd$." 9. On a plain reading of the gist of the complaint, it is evident that the de facto complainant alleges he was - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 wrongfully restrained by certain members of the executive committee of the apartment association, including the petitioner, and that he was subjected to physical assault. However, a closer scrutiny of the extracted portion of the complaint reveals that no specific overt act is attributed to the petitioner. Although there is an allegation that the complainant was assaulted, the complaint does not identify the individual who allegedly inflicted such assault. The allegations are general in nature, broadly implicating the petitioner along with eleven other members of the committee, without any clear description of the role played by each person. Such omnibus allegations, without assigning distinct responsibility to any individual accused, weaken the very substratum of the prosecution case insofar as the petitioner is concerned. 10. When these allegations in the complaint are examined in the light of the statements of the purported eyewitnesses, namely CWs.4 to 9, an even more significant aspect comes to light. The Investigating Officer, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 despite having recorded their statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C., has failed to notice that these witnesses have not, in any manner, supported the version of the complainant. On the contrary, each of these witnesses, whose statements form part of the charge sheet material, has consistently stated that it was the complainant who created a commotion when questioned by the members of the committee. The tenor of their statements suggests that the complainant’s conduct, rather than any act on the part of the petitioner or other members, was the source of the disturbance. 11. The statements of CWs.4 to 9, being contemporaneous accounts recorded by the Investigating Officer, assume crucial significance in the evaluation of whether there exists a prima facie case against the petitioner. These statements, which are part of the charge sheet, do not corroborate the complainant’s version of being assaulted by the petitioner or the other committee members. In fact, they point in the opposite direction, - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 suggesting that no wrongful restraint or assault, as alleged, can be attributed to the petitioner. The Investigating Officer, while filing the charge sheet, appears to have overlooked the material effect of these statements, which strike at the very root of the prosecution case. 12. Before adverting to the peculiar facts of the present matter, it is apposite to recapitulate the settled principles that guide the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 13. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal1 is the locus classicus on the subject. It underscores that although the inherent power of the High Court is wide, it is to be exercised sparingly and with circumspection. The judgment enumerates illustrative categories wherein quashing of criminal proceedings may be justified, such as where the allegations, even if taken at face value, do not 1 1992 AIR 604 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 constitute any offence; where the proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide intent or instituted to wreak vengeance; or where the criminal process is used as a weapon of harassment. Every petition seeking quashment must therefore be tested on whether it falls within any of the recognised parameters laid down in Bhajan Lal. 14. The subsequent decision in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra2 clarifies that the High Court should ordinarily refrain from stalling an investigation or granting blanket protection once a charge-sheet is filed or when the investigation discloses material supporting the allegations. Interim orders or interference at the threshold should be exceptional and must be backed by brief but cogent reasons. However, Neeharika does not foreclose intervention altogether; it preserves the High Court’s discretion to quash proceedings where continuation would 2 2021 SCC Online SC 315 - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 result in a clear miscarriage of justice or perpetuate an abuse of process. 15. When a criminal complaint is lodged belatedly, particularly after an earlier complaint by the opposite party, courts have consistently treated such complaints with caution. Judicial pronouncements, including recent High Court rulings such as Varun H.S. v. State of Karnataka3, emphasise that counter-blasts filed without plausible explanation for delay and lacking contemporaneous material to support the accusation warrant close scrutiny. The timing, surrounding circumstances, and absence of credible corroboration may expose such proceedings as retaliatory devices rather than genuine attempts to seek justice. 16. At the stage of considering a petition under Section 482, the Court is primarily concerned with the uncontroverted materials collected during investigation. Where statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., 3 Criminal Petition No.7526 of 2023 - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 medical-legal records, CCTV footage or other primary evidence gathered by the Investigating Officer fail to substantiate the complaint, or, worse, contradict its gravamen, the case may squarely fall within one or more Bhajan Lal categories. Conversely, where the charge-sheet contains cogent incriminating evidence, the High Court should refrain from embarking upon an appreciation of disputed facts. 17. Another relevant facet, recognised by several courts, is the authenticity and relevance of medical documentation relied upon by the complainant. If such records were not collected during investigation, are undated or antidated, or otherwise fail to correspond with the date and manner of the alleged incident, their probative worth is seriously diminished. When such infirm medical material is coupled with consistent Section 161 statements from independent witnesses that disown the prosecution case or implicate the complainant as the - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 aggressor, the cumulative effect strongly militates against the continuance of criminal proceedings. 18. In view of the above principles, the statements of CWs.4 to 9 merit reproduction, as they bear directly on the question whether continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. CW-4 / gÀÆ¥Á° ¥ÀÈy PÉÆÃA ¥ÀĤÃvï ¥ÀÈy "xxxx ನಮj ಪ"#$ೕ% 'ೆ$ ಉ*l ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾAiÀiïÌ ಎಂಬುವರು ಈ6ೆF ಸುಾರು 6 Nಂಗಳ XಂVೆ ಟವn-3 oಾ0/ ನಂ. 3211 6ೆ ಬಂ1ರು`ಾIೆ. ಬಂVಾpqಂದ ಪ"#$ೕ% 'ೆ$ ಉ*l ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 ಜನIೊಂ16ೆ ಆ6ಾF6ೆF ಜಗಳ'ಾಡುವ)ದು. ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 ಅನPಕೃತ ವRವ9ಾರಗಳS ನWೆಯುNVೆ ಎಂದು ಸುಳST ಸು1ಗಳನುL ೕ ಕಂ5ೊ"ೕs ರೂಂ 6ೆ qೕಡುವ)ದು 9ಾಗೂ ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 >ೆಲಸ ಾಡುವ ೆಕೂRCd ಮತು 9ೌ @ೕJಂA ಜನರುಗ<6ೆ ಅ'ಾಚR ಶಬಗ<ಂದ ಬಯುRವ)ದು ಾಡುNರು`ಾIೆ. ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯv ಒಂದು xೕ1 2ಾy ಾ@>ೊಂದು, ಆ 2ಾyಯನುL ಜನರ ೕzೆ ಭೂ xಡುವ)ದು ಾಡುNರು`ಾ2ೆ Dತನು ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಏCDಾದ0 2ಾy|ಂ16ೆ ಸು`ಾಡು`ಾ ಇNೕUೆ6ೆ ಆತನ ಉಪಟಳ 4ಾ# ಆpರುತVೆ. 12ಾಂಕ 14-06-2023 ರಂದು IಾN" 12-45 - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ನನ6ೆ ೕ ಾ qನL ೕzೆ ಅನPಕೃತ ವRವ9ಾರ ಾಡುN1ೕಯ ಎಂದು ೕೕಸC6ೆ ೕ ಾ1ೕq ಎಂದು N<# ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ. 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಸಂ4ೆ 7-30 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಕ08 9ೌ ನ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಮXOೆಯIೊಂ16ೆ ಅಸಭR'ಾp ವN.ಸುNದು, ಈ ಬ6ೆF ನನ6ೆ ~ೕ ಬಂ1ದು, 2ಾನು ಅ•ೆ€ೕ•ೕಷ ಂಬn ಆpದCಂದ 2ಾನು ಕ08 9ೌ 6ೆ ಬರುNVಾಗ ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} ನನLನುL ತWೆದು qೕನು ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 ಸೂOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ, ಅನPಕೃತ ಕೃತRಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು ನನ6ೆ 9ೇಳS`ಾ, ನನ6ೆ ಕಟ$>ೆಟ$ ಶಬಗಳ0 ೈದು qನLನುL 4ೈ6ೆ ಕಳSXಸು`ೇ2ೆ, qನL ೕzೆ ೕ >ೇಸು ಾಸು`ೇ2ೆ ಇ`ಾR1Dಾp ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ. ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ನನL ಗಂಡ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯಕನನುL >ೇಳಲು 9ೋpVಾಗ ಾN6ೆ ಾತು ೆOೆದು >ೈ >ೈ ‚zಾyಸುವ ಹಂತ>ೆ} 9ೋp ತOಾTಟ ನೂ>ಾಟ ಆpರುತVೆ. ಅ,ಾ/. ಂƒ ಜನರು ನಮjನುL ತWೆ1ರು`ಾIೆ. ಈ ಘಟ2ೆಯ ಬ6ೆF ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ}ರ ೕzೆ 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಾಗIೋ* ೕ ೆ$ೕಷ ನ0 ಕಂ,ೆ0ೕ/ ಾದು, ಅದು >ೆ…ಂ. ನಂ. 175/2023 ರ0 >ೇಸು VಾಖzಾpರುತVೆ. xxxx " CW-5 / ²æÃ. ¤vÉñï PÀĪÀiÁgï ©£ï ±ÁAw¯Á¯ï "xxxx - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು 2ಾನು >ೆಲಸ ಮುp#>ೊಂಡು ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ,ಾ@ಂ.A ಾಡುNVಾಗ ಪ)qೕƒ ಮತು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ನಡು'ೆ ಗzಾ5ೆ ನWೆಯುNದು, ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 ಇಬˆರು ಒಬˆC6ೊಬˆರು ತOಾT>ೊಂಡು ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾ>ೊಂರು`ಾIೆ. ನಂತರ 2ಾನು ಅವCಬˆರ ಹNರ ಬಂVಾಗ ಗzಾ5ೆ qಂNತು. ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 2ಾನು Uಾರ ಏ2ೆಂದು ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರನುL >ೇ<Vಾಗ ಅವರು N<#Vೇ2ೆಂದIೆ, ಸಂ4ೆ 6-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} 2ಾyಯನುL Xದು>ೊಂಡು ಆಟ'ಾಡುNದ ಮಕ}ಳ ಬ< 2ಾy `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂಡು 9ೋpದು ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 9ೆಂಗಸರು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವC6ೆ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾVಾIೆ. ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಆತನು ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ರವರ 9ೆಸರನುL `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂಡು >ೆಟ$Vಾp ಾತ2ಾದು, ಈ UಾರವನುL N<ದ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ಕ08 9ೌ ಬ<ೕ ಬಂVಾಗ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ qೕನು ಸೂOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ, ಅನPಕೃತ >ೆಲಸಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು >ೆಟ$>ೆಟ$ ಶಬಗಳ0 ೈದು. "qನLನುL 4ೈ6ೆ ಕಳSXಸು`ೇ2ೆ, qನL ೕzೆ ೕ >ೇಸು ಾಸು`ೇ2ೆ ಇ`ಾR1Dಾp ೈದು ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ" ಎಂದು N<#ದರು. ನಂತರ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ೕzೆ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾದ >ಾರಣ N<yತು. xxxx " CW-6 / ²æÃ. ¤gÀªï eÉÆö ©£ï ±ÉʯÉñï "xxxx 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಸಂ4ೆ 6-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} 2ಾyಯನುL Xದು>ೊಂಡು - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 ಆಟ'ಾಡುNದ ಮಕ}ಳ ಬ< 2ಾy `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂಡು 9ೋpVಾ2ೆ. ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 9ೆಂಗಸರು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವC6ೆ ಮಕ}ಳ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾದು, ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಆತನು ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ >ೆಟ$Vಾp ಾತ2ಾದು, ಈ UಾರವನುL N<ದ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ಸಂ4ೆ 7-15 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ಕ08 9ೌ ಬ<ೕ ಬಂVಾಗ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ qೕನು ಸೂOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ, ಅನPಕೃತ >ೆಲಸಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು >ೆಟ$>ೆಟ$ ಶಬಗಳ0 ೈದು, "qನLನುL 4ೈ6ೆ ಕಳSXಸು`ೇ2ೆ. qನL ೕzೆ ೕ >ೇಸು ಾಸು`ೇ2ೆ ಇ`ಾR1Dಾp ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ". ಈ Uಾರ N<ದ ರೂ,ಾ ರವರ ಗಂಡ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರು ಬಂzÀÄ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ಹNರ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾರು`ಾIೆ ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 ಇಬˆರ ನಡು'ೆ 4ೋIಾp ಾ`ಾ ಒಬˆC6ೊಬˆರು ತOಾTರು`ಾIೆ. 2ಾನು ಅವCಬˆರ ಗzಾ5ೆಯನುL x#ರು`ೇ2ೆ. ಇVಾದ ನಂತರ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ರವರು ಾಗIೋ* ೕ ೆ$ೕಷ 6ೆ ಬಂದು ಕಂ,ೆ0ೕ/ ಾ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ೕzೆ >ೇಸು ಾ#ರು`ಾIೆ. ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ 9ೆಂಗಸರು ಮತು ಮಕ}ಳ ೕzೆ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾಡುNದು, ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಜನರು ಸºÀB Iೋ# 9ೋpದು, ಅವರು ಸಹಃ ಆತನ ರುದ] ದೂರು qೕಡಲು #ದCಗು`ಾIೆ. ನWೆದ ಷಯವನುL ತಮj0 N<#ರು`ೇ2ೆ. Uಾರೆ ಸಲು'ಾp ಮ`ೆ ಕIೆದIೆ ತಪ‹Vೇ 9ಾdgÁಗು`ೇ2ೆ. " CW-7 / ²æÃ. «±Á¯ï PÀĪÀiÁgï ©£ï jPÀ¨ï ZÀAzï "xxxx - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಸಂ4ೆ 6-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} 2ಾyಯನುL Xದು>ೊಂಡು ಆಟ'ಾಡುNದ ಮಕ}ಳ ಬ< 2ಾy `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂಡು 9ೋpVಾ2ೆ. ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 2ಾವ) ಸಂ4ೆ 'ಾ@ಂA 6ೆ ಕ08 ಏCDಾದ0 'ಾ@ಂA 6ೆ ಬಂ1Vಾಗ ಸಂ4ೆ 7-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ >ೆಲವ) ಮXOೆಯರು ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} ನನುL Xದು>ೊಂಡು ಮಕ}ಳ ಬ< 2ಾyಯನುL ತರದಂ`ೆ ಆತನನುL ತIಾ5ೆ6ೆ `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂರು`ಾIೆ. ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಆತನು ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ >ೆಟ$Vಾp ಾತ2ಾದು, ಸಂ4ೆ 7-15 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ರೂ,ಾ ರವರು ಕ08 9ೌ ಬ<ೕ ಬಂVಾಗ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ಅವIೊಂ16ೆ ಅಸಭR'ಾp ವN.ದು. ಇದನುL ಪ"•L#ದ ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ qೕನು ಸೂOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ. ಅನPಕೃತ >ೆಲಸಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು >ೆಟ$>ೆಟ$ ಶಬಗಳ0 ೈದು. 'qನLನುL 4ೈ6ೆ ಕಳSXಸು`ೇ2ೆ. qನL ೕzೆ ೕ >ೇಸು ಾಸು`ೇ2ೆ ಇ`ಾR1Dಾp ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ'. ನಂತರ ರೂ,ಾ ರವರ ಗಂಡ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರು ಬಂದು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ಹNರ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾರು`ಾgÉ F ¸ÀªÀÄAiÀÄzÀ°è ಇಬˆರ ನಡು'ೆ 4ೋರ ಾ`ಾp ಒಬˆC6ೊಬˆರು ತOಾTರು`ಾIೆ. ಇVಾದ ನಂತರ ರೂ,ಾ ಾUÀr Iೋ* ೕ ೆ$ೕಷ 6ೆ ಬಂದು ಕಂ,ೆ0ೕ/ ಾ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ೕzೆ >ೇಸು ಾ#ರು`ಾIೆ…………." CW-8 / ²æÃ. ªÀ°èAiÀĪÀÄä PÉÆÃA D£ÀAzï "xxxx - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಮOೆ ಬಂ1ದು, 2ಾನು ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ೈ/ ನ0 ಮOೆ qಲು0ವIೆ6ೆ qಂತು>ೊಂVೆನು ಅ06ೆ ಬಂದ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ನನ6ೆ ಏ>ೆ ಇ0 ಇ1ೕDಾ ಇದು ನಮj ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ qೕವ) ಏ>ೆ ಇ01ೕರ 9ೋp ಎಂದು ಅ'ಾಚುR ಶಬಗ<ಂದ ೈದು qೕವ) ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ನ0 ಮಾ% ಾಡುNೕರ ಎಂ©`ಾR1Dಾp ಅ'ಾಚR ಶಬಗ<ಂದ ೈದು 2ಾyಯನುL ಚೂ xd$ದು, ಅದು ನನL #ೕC ಕ‘’ 9ಾಳS ಾರುತVೆ. ಈ UಾರವನುL 2ಾನು ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಅ•ೆ€ೕ•ೕಷ ಂಬn ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ N<#Vಾಗ ಅವರು ಈ ಬ6ೆF ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರನುL >ೇ<Vಾಗ ಅವರು ರೂ,ಾಗೂ ಸಹಃ ೈ1ರು`ಾIೆ. ಅVೇ Uಾರದ ಬ6ೆF 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಸಂ4ೆ 6-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} 7-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಮXOೆಯರನುL ೈ1ದು, ಮXOೆಯರು ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} ನನುL Xದು>ೊಂಡು ಮಕ}ಳ Uಾರ'ಾp ತIಾ5ೆ6ೆ `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂರು`ಾIೆ. ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ >ೆಟ$Vಾp ಾತ2ಾದು, ಸಂ4ೆ 7-15 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ರೂ,ಾ ರವರು ಕ08 9ೌ ಬ<ೕ ಬಂVಾಗ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ಅವIೊಂ16ೆ ಅಸಭR'ಾp ವN.ದು. ಇದನುL ಪ"•L#ದ ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ qೕನು ಸೂOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ, ಅನPಕೃತ >ೆಲಸಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು >ೆಟ$>ೆಟ$ ಶಬಗಳ0 ೈದು. `qನLನುL 4ೈ6ೆ ಕಳSXಸು`ೇ2ೆ, qನL ೕzೆ ೕ >ೇಸು ಾಸು`ೇ2ೆ ಇ`ಾR1Dಾp ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ". ನಂತರ ರೂ,ಾC ರವರ ಗಂಡ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರು ಬಂದು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ಹwÛgÀ UÀ¯ÁmÉ >ಾ}ಟ’ ಾರು`ಾIೆ ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 ಇಬˆರ ನಡು'ೆ 4ೋರು ಾ`ಾp ಒಬˆC6ೊಬˆರು vÀ¼Áîrರು`ಾIೆ. ಇVಾದ ನಂತರ - 20 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 ರೂ,ಾ ರವರು ಾಗIೋ* ೕ ೆ$ೕಷ 6ೆ ಬಂದು ಕಂ,ೆ0ೕ/ ಾ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ೕzೆ >ೇಸು ಾ#ರು`ಾIೆ. ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} gÀªÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಜನರು ಸºÀB Iೋ# 9ೋpದು, ಅವರು ಸಹಃ ಆತನ ರುದ] ದೂರು qೕಡಲು #ದCಗು`ಾIೆ. ನWೆದ ಷಯವನುL ತಮj0 N<#ರು`ೇ2ೆ. Uಾರೆ ಸಲು'ಾp ಮ`ೆ ಕIೆದIೆ ತಪ‹Vೇ 9ಾdgÁಗು`ೇ2ೆ." CW-9 / ²æÃ. C©üµÉÃPï ªÉĺÁÛ ©£ï ±ÁAw¯Á¯ï ªÉĺÁÛ "xxxx 12ಾಂಕ 15-06-2023 ರಂದು ಸಂ4ೆ 6-00 ಗಂ5ೆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಪ"mಾಕn 2ಾಯ} 2ಾyಯನುL Xದು>ೊಂಡು ಆಟ'ಾಡುNದ ಮಕ}ಳ ಬ< 2ಾy `ೆ6ೆದು>ೊಂಡು 9ೋpVಾ2ೆ. ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 9ೆಂಗಸರು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವC6ೆ ಮಕ}ಳ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾದು, ಆ ಸಮಯದ0 ಆತನು ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ >ೆಟ$Vಾp ಾತ2ಾದು, ಈ UಾರವನುL N<ದ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರ 9ೆಂಡN ರೂ,ಾ ಸಂ4ೆ 7-15 ಗಂ5ೆ6ೆ ಕ08 9ೌ ಬ½Ã ಬಂVಾಗ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರೂ,ಾ ರವC6ೆ qೕನು ಸೂOೆ6ಾC>ೆ ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ, ಅನPಕೃತ >ೆಲಸಗಳನುL ಾಡುN1ೕDಾ ಎಂದು >ೆಟ$>ೆಟ$ ಶಬಗಳ0 ೈದು, "qನLನುL 4ೈ6ೆ ಕಳSXಸು`ೇ2ೆ. qನL ೕzೆ ೕ >ೇಸು ಾಸು`ೇ2ೆ ಇ`ಾR1Dಾp ೆದC>ೆ 9ಾ@ರು`ಾ2ೆ". ಈ Uಾರ N<ದ ರೂ,ಾ ರವರ ಗಂಡ ಪ)qೕƒ ರವರು ಬಂದು ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ಹNರ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾರು`ಾIೆ ಈ ಸಮಯದ0 ಇಬˆರ ನಡು'ೆ 4ೋIಾp ಾ`ಾ ಒಬˆC6ೊಬˆರು ತOಾTರು`ಾIೆ. ಇVಾದ ನಂತರ ರೂ,ಾ - 21 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 ರವರು ಾಗIೋ* ೕ ೆ$ೕಷ 6ೆ ಬಂದು ಕಂ,ೆ0ೕ/ ಾ ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ರವರ ೕzೆ >ೇಸು ಾ#ರು`ಾIೆ. ಪ"mಾಕರ 2ಾಯ} ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ 9ೆಂಗಸರು ಮತು ಮಕ}ಳ ೕzೆ ಗzಾ5ೆ ಾಡುNದು, ಅ,ಾ/. ಂ/ ಜನರು ಸಹಃ Iೋ# 9ೋpದು, ಅವರು ಸಹಃ ಆತನ ರುದ] ದೂರು qೕಡಲು #ದ]Cರು`ಾIೆ. £ÀqÉzÀ «µÀAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ತಮj0 N<#ರು`ೇ2ೆ. Uಾರೆ ಸಲು'ಾp ಮ`ೆ ಕIೆದIೆ ತಪ‹Vೇ 9ಾಜIಾಗು`ೇ2ೆ." 19. The Investigating Officer, while discharging his statutory duties, is expected to maintain complete fairness, objectivity, and neutrality in the course of investigation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has time and again emphasized that an investigation must not be an instrument of harassment but a process in aid of justice. In State of Bihar vs. P.P. Sharma4, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that investigation must be conducted in a fair, impartial, and judicious manner, uninfluenced by extraneous considerations, and that a charge sheet filed without due regard to the evidence collected would amount to abuse of process. Similarly, in Bhagwant 4 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222 - 22 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 Singh vs. Commissioner of Police5, it was observed that the investigating agency is duty-bound to evaluate the material objectively and not merely act as a mouthpiece of the complainant. Again, in Vineet Narain vs. Union of India6, the Court reiterated that the rule of law mandates fair investigation, and any bias, selective appreciation, or suppression of exculpatory evidence would undermine the very foundation of justice. 20. In the present case, the conduct of the Investigating Officer in filing the charge sheet despite the categorical statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which absolve the petitioner of any wrongdoing, demonstrates a clear departure from these settled principles. The material collected during investigation, far from implicating the petitioner, discloses that it was the complainant who initiated the quarrel. Yet, the Investigating Officer, ignoring these exculpatory circumstances, has proceeded to file a charge sheet against the petitioner in a 5 (1985) 2 SCC 537 6 (1998) 1 SCC 226 - 23 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 mechanical and partisan manner. Such an approach not only reflects lack of neutrality but also renders the investigation unfair and legally unsustainable. The continuation of proceedings based on such tainted investigation would amount to miscarriage of justice, warranting interference by this Hon’ble Court in exercise of its inherent powers. 21. The petitioner has relied upon certain medical records in an attempt to demonstrate that the complainant sustained injuries in the alleged incident. A careful perusal of these documents reveals that they do not form part of the charge sheet material collected by the Investigating Officer. Even otherwise, these records do not correspond with the date or time of the alleged occurrence. Some of the certificates appear to be either antedated or issued subsequent to the incident, and there is no clear nexus between the contents of those records and the allegations of physical assault set out in the written complaint. Mere production of such stray documents, which were never - 24 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 examined by the Investigating Officer or tested in the course of investigation, cannot by itself lend credibility to the prosecution version. 22. Another circumstance that weighs with this Court is the unexplained delay in setting the criminal law in motion. The complaint was lodged nearly one month after the date of the alleged incident, and no cogent explanation is offered either in the complaint or in the charge sheet as to why the complainant chose to remain silent during this period. Such an inordinate and unexplained delay, particularly in matters alleging wrongful restraint and simple assault, detracts materially from the reliability of the accusation. Courts have consistently held that belated complaints, especially when they emerge as a counterblast to earlier proceedings, must be scrutinised with circumspection, for they tend to suggest an afterthought or a device to neutralise action already taken. In the present case, the backdrop in which the petitioner’s wife had earlier lodged a complaint - 25 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 alleging misbehaviour and verbal abuse by the de facto complainant lends support to the contention that the present proceedings were initiated only to counteract that complaint rather than to redress any genuine grievance arising from the incident of 15.06.2023. 23. Even assuming the charge sheet material is accepted in its entirety, the peculiar facts on record do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences alleged. The statements of the independent eyewitnesses – CWs.4 to 9 recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. uniformly fail to support the prosecution version; rather, they indicate that it was the complainant who had acted in a disorderly manner when questioned by the committee members. When the substratum of the prosecution case is not borne out by its own witnesses, and when medical evidence belatedly set up has no nexus to the incident, allowing the proceedings to continue would serve no purpose but to harass the petitioner. In the considered view of this Court, such a prosecution would amount to an abuse of the - 26 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 process of law. To secure the ends of justice, therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner deserve to be quashed in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 24. Conclusion: (i) Upon an anxious consideration of the materials placed on record and the principles laid down in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, and the decisions of various High Courts on belated counter-complaints, this Court is of the clear view that the present prosecution cannot be permitted to continue. The complaint was lodged almost a month after the alleged occurrence without any explanation for such delay. It was preceded by a complaint lodged by the petitioner’s wife, alleging misbehaviour and abuse by the de-facto complainant. The timing and circumstances of registration of the present FIR unmistakably indicate that it was conceived as a counter- - 27 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 blast to neutralise the earlier proceedings, rather than as a bona fide effort to report a genuine offence. (ii) The charge-sheet materials further undermine the prosecution case. The statements of CWs.4 to 9, recorded contemporaneously under Section 161 Cr.P.C., do not support the complainant’s version; instead, they reveal that it was the complainant who created a disturbance when questioned by the members of the association. No overt act of wrongful restraint or assault is attributed to the petitioner. The medical documents now relied upon were not part of the investigation, do not synchronise with the alleged date and time of occurrence, and lack any clear nexus with the injuries alleged in the written complaint. (iii) Criminal law cannot be allowed to become an instrument for settling personal scores or silencing rival complaints. Where the substratum of the case is built on omnibus allegations, uncorroborated by its own witnesses, - 28 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 and fortified only by belated or unverified medical evidence, permitting the prosecution to proceed would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court. Belated counter-complaints, especially those unsupported by contemporaneous material, must therefore be scrutinised with circumspection, and in appropriate cases interdicted at the threshold to secure the ends of justice. (iv) In the considered opinion of this Court, the present case satisfies the parameters warranting the exercise of inherent jurisdiction. Continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would cause manifest injustice and serve no legitimate purpose. 25. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed; (ii) The proceedings pending in C.C.No.60/2024 on the file of the learned 24th - 29 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38432 CRL.P No. 14358 of 2024 Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 323 of IPC, insofar as petitioner is concerned, are hereby quashed. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE CA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 65