- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 968 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. PINIYA NAIK S/O LATE MADHA NAIK AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS 2. SMT. SUMATHI BAI W/O PINIYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS 3. SRI. NANDA KISHORE S/O PINIYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 4. SRI. KRISHNA NAIK S/O LATE SOMA NAIK AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PETITIONERS NO. 1 TO 4 ARE R/AT MUNDADY MELMANE KADOOR GRAMA AND POST BRAHMAVARA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576234. 5. SRI. SHYAMA NAIK S/O GIRIJA BAI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT SIGANAKODI CHERKADY GRAMA AND POST BRAHMAVARA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576234. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA .M.R, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BRAHMAVAR PS UDUPI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001. 2. SMT. AKKAYYA W/O ANNAYYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/A MUNDADI MELMANE KADOOR VILLAGE, BRAHMAVARA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT-576234. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CR.NO.243/2023, DATED 19.12.2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, UDUPI FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 447, 504, 506, 149 OF IPC, REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 / BRAHMAVAR P.S., BASED ON THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AGAINST THE PETITIONERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The petitioners are seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in Crime No.243/2023 for the offence - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 punishable under Sections 143, 147, 427, 504, 323, 354, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Udupi. 2. This Court deems it fit to extract the contents of the FIR, which reads as under; "ಪಕರಣದ ಾ ದುನ ಾರಂಶೆೆಂದೆ: ಬಾವರ ಾಲೂಕು ಾಡೂರು ಾಮದ ಮುಂಾ !ೕಲೆ ಎಂಬ$% &ಾಂಕ 18.12.2023 ರಂದು ಾ &(ಾರರು ತನ* ಮಗ ಾಗೂ ಮಗ,ೆ-ಂ&ೆ ಮೆಯ$%ರುಾಗ ಸಮಯ ಸು0ಾರು 5:00 ಗಂ1ೆೆ ಆೋ3 1ೇ 34ಯ ಾಯ5 ಎಂಬವರು ಆೋ3ಗ,ಾದ 2ೇ ಸುಮ6 7ಾ8, 3ೇ ನಂದ9:ೆ;ೕರ, 4ೇ ಕೃಷ> ಾಯ5, 5ೇ :ಾ?ಮ ಾಯ5 ಎಂಬವರ @ೊೆ ಅಕಮಕೂಟ ೇCೊಂಡು ಾ &(ಾರರ ಮೆಯ ಅಂಗಳೆ5 ಅಕಮ ಪೇಶ 0ಾ , ಾ &(ಾರರನು* ಉ(ೆFೕGH, Iೕನು ಒಂದು ಾರದ ಒಳೆ ಮಕ5ಳನು* ಕೆದುೊಂಡು ಮೆ KಟುL ೋಗ 7ೇಕು ಈ ಸNಳವನು* ಾನು ನನ* ೆಸCೆ 0ಾ ೊಂ ರುೆ, Iನೆ ಇದರ$% ಾವP(ೇ ಅQಾರ ಇಲ% ಎಂದು ೇRದುF ಅದೆ5 ಾ &(ಾರರು ಇದು ನಮ ಮೆ ಾನು ಾಗೂ ನನ* ಮಕ5ಳS ಇTೆ% ಇರುವPದು ಎಂ(ಾಗ ಆೋ3ಗ,ೆಲ%ರೂ ೇC 7ೇವU , ರಂೆ ಎಂದು ಅಾಚ? ಶಬFಗRಂದ 7ೈದು, ಒಂದು ಾರದ ಒಳಾX ಮೆ Yಾ$ 0ಾಡ&ದF$% Iನ*ನು* ಾಗೂ Iನ* ಮಕ5ಳನು* ಮೆೆ ೊX ೊಂದು KಡುವP(ಾX ೊTೆ 7ೆದCೆ ಾ9ರುಾZೆ. ಅಲ%(ೇ ಾ &(ಾರರು ೆಟುL 7ೆ,ೆHರುವ ೆಂXನ ಮರಗಳನು* ಾಗೂ ಇತರ ಮರಗಳನು* ಕ ದು ಮೆಯನು* - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 ೆಲಸಮೊRH ಸಮತಟುL 0ಾಡುವ ಬೆ[ ಆೋ3ಗಳS 0ಾತಾ ೊಂ ರುಾZೆ ಎಂKಾ?&." 3. This Court has carefully examined the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 – complainant. The allegation in substance is that on 18.12.2023 the petitioners physically abused the complainant, issued threats to her life, and compelled her to hand over the vacant possession of the disputed property. It is significant to note that in a connected matter in Crl.P.No.1010/2024, a complaint was lodged on 19.12.2023 alleging that a similar incident had occurred on 17.12.2023. Thus, two different complaints have been filed within a short span of time, both lodged on the same date i.e., 19.12.2023, but attributing incidents to different dates, namely 17.12.2023 and 18.12.2023. This itself creates serious doubt about the veracity of the allegations and lends support to the contention of the petitioners that the complaints are motivated and orchestrated with an oblique purpose. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 4. On a plain reading of the allegations made in the FIR, it is evident that the allegations are stereotypical and repetitive in nature. The complainant has merely alleged that the petitioners have abused and threatened her to vacate the premises, without furnishing specific details as to the time, place, or manner of the alleged acts. It is also not in dispute that the complainant and the petitioners are closely related family members. A comprehensive partition suit in O.S.No.78/2025 is pending between the parties before the jurisdictional Civil Court. Apart from this, there are also two separate injunction suits pending between other family members relating to the same properties. 5. When the rights of the parties are already sub judice in a comprehensive partition suit, any grievance concerning possession, use or enjoyment of the joint family property necessarily has to be agitated and resolved in the civil proceedings. Instead, the complainant, by lodging the present complaint, has attempted to give a criminal colour to what is essentially a civil dispute relating - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 to partition and possession. Such an approach cannot be countenanced, for it results in the abuse of the criminal justice machinery and amounts to exerting pressure on the petitioners in a collateral manner. The Supreme Court and this Court in a catena of judgments have repeatedly held that criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to be used as a weapon to settle civil disputes or private property claims. 6. Having regard to the totality of circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the present complaint is frivolous and mala fide, filed only to harass the petitioners and to convert a civil dispute into a criminal proceeding. Continuation of such proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, this petition deserves to be allowed. 7. In view of the above, this Court proceeds to pass the following; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2024:KHC:53456 CRL.P No. 968 of 2024 ORDER (i) The criminal petition is allowed. (ii) The proceedings in Crime No.243/2023 dated 19.12.2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447, 504, 506 and 149 of IPC, and now pending before the Court of the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Udupi, are hereby quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1