- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5917 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SMT. MAHADEVI W/O VEERAIAH @ VEERAIAH SWAMY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS NO 728 (OLD 11 AND 13) OTC MAIN ROAD, NEAR ADINATHA JAIN TEMPLE, CHICKPET, BANGALORE-560053 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.A.R.PAWAR, ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ARCHANA MURTHY.P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI.RAJU KATHAVARAIAH.B.N S/O VAIRAMUTTU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO 109, 2ND BLOCK, 38TH CROSS ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE-10 2. SRI MANI BHARATHI K S/O RAJU KATHAVARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT NO 109, 2ND BLOCK, 38TH CROSS ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE-10 Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 3. SRI G P VEERABADRAPPA S/O LATE G V RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/AT NO 5, HAYAVADHANA RAO ROAD, OPP RAMAKRISHNA ASHRAM HOSTEL GAVIPURAM EXTENSION BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560004 4. SRI DR G R PARANJYOTHI S/O LATE G V RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT NO 4, HAYAVADHANA RAO ROAD, OPP RAMAKRISHNA ASHRAM HOSTEL GAVIPURAM EXTENSION BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560004 5. SMT MANGALA D/O LATE G V RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO 3, HAYAVADHANA RAO ROAD, OPP RAMAKRISHNA ASHRAM HOSTEL GAVIPURAM EXTENSION BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560004 6. SRI G R SACHIDANADA S/O LATE G V RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO 5, HAYAVADHANA RAO ROAD, OPP RAMAKRISHNA ASHRAM HOSTEL GAVIPURAM EXTENSION BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE-560004 7. SMT NIRMALA D/O LATE G V CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 R/AT GOWRA, NO 19, 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, CHAMARAJ PET, BANGALORE-560018 8. SMT SUJATHA W/O LATE G.C.BASAVAPRABHU AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT GOWRA, NO 19, 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, CHAMARAJ PET, BANGALORE-560018 9. SRI G C SURESH S/O LATE G V CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT GOWRA, NO 19, 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, CHAMARAJ PET, BANGALORE-560018 10. SRI G C UMAKANTH S/O LATE G V CHANNABASAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT GOWRA, NO 19, 2ND CROSS, 3RD MAIN, CHAMARAJ PET, BANGALORE-560018 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHETAN DESAI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.05.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED HONBLE COURT IX A.C.M.M AT BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.11548/2023 AND REQUEST THIS HONBLE COURT TO PASS AN ORDER OF COGNIZANCE AGAINST ACCUSED NO.1 TO 10 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 448,452,453,504 AND 506 R/W 149 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER Petitioner who is complainant has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the order dated 18.05.2023 in PCR.No.11760/2020, on the file of IX ACMM, Bengaluru, taking cognizance only against accused Nos.1 and 2 and thereby, refusing to take cognizance as against accused Nos.3 to 10, for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 452, 453, 504 and 506 r/w Section 149 IPC. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court. 3. Complainant filed a complaint against accused Nos.1 to 10 alleging that she and her family members are in possession and enjoyment of a property situated in Chikkapete. Veeraiah @ Veeraiah Swamy, the husband of complainant was the foster son of late Gowdara Veerabhadrappa. When Veeraiah @ Veeraiah Swamy was - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 a bachelor, he worked with late Karibasamma, wife of Gowdara Veerabhadrappa. Karibasamma allowed the husband of complainant to enjoy the said property and told him that he need not pay any rent or other kind of money and that it belongs to him and his family members. Being aware of the same, accused Nos.3 to 10, never interfere with the possession and enjoyment of said property. 4. Off late, the value of said property has increased since it is located in Chikkapete. However, on 10.03.2019, accused Nos.3 to 10 abruptly interfered with the possession and enjoyment of the said property. The intention of accused Nos.1 to 10 is to force complainant and her family members to vacate the said property. Therefore, complainant filed O.S.No.2372/2019 and secured temporary injunction. Accused Nos.3 to 10 appeared and filed objections. On 15.06.2020, the trial Court dismissed I.A.No.1, but observed that the said order is subject to extension of interim orders passed by the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka during closure of the Courts due to COVID-19. It means that interim order is still in force. On 05.08.2020, though there was interim order, accused Nos.1 and 2 trespassed into the suit property by breaking open the lock. Even though she and her family members tried to prevent them, they could not do anything. Accused Nos.1 and 2 replaced the lock put by the complainant by their locks and prevented the complainant from entering into the house. The concerned police have not entertained the complaint filed by the complainant. The higher police officers have also not chosen take action and hence the complaint. 5. The trial Court referred the complaint to the concerned police for investigation. However, they filed 'B' report, on the ground that despite notices being issued, the complainant has not co-operated with the investigation by producing necessary documents. Complainant filed protest petition. The trial Court rejected the 'B' report and permitted the complainant to lead evidence. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 6. Accordingly, the complainant gave evidence as CW-1, her son as CW-2 and one witness as CW-3. 7. Considering the evidence led by the complainant, vide impugned order, the trial Court directed registering of the criminal case against accused Nos.1 and 2. 8. Aggrieved by the fact that the trial Court has failed to order for registering criminal case against accused Nos.3 to 10, the complainant has come up with this petition contending that despite there being evidence against accused Nos.3 to 10, the trial Court has committed error in not taking cognizance against them. 9. It is pertinent to note that during the course of the complaint, the complainant has specifically stated that accused Nos.3 to 10 were aware of the fact that Karibasamma has permitted the husband of complainant to occupy the property in dispute and therefore initially they did not interfere. However, on 10.03.2019, accused - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 Nos.3 to 10 abruptly interfered with their possession and enjoyment of the suit property and on 05.08.2020, accused Nos.1 and 2 forcefully removed the lock put by the complainant and replaced it with their lock. 10. However, during the course of the evidence, CW-1 has deposed that it was accused Nos.1 and 2 who interfered with complainants possession of the schedule property and abused them. The evidence of CW-2 reveal that he was not present when the incident took place and later came to know from complainant that accused Nos.1 and 2 broke open the door and when he enquired with them, they told that it is the trustee of G Veerabhadra Trust who have broke open the door. His evidence with regard to the actual incident is hearsay. Therefore, considering the evidence led by the complainant, the trial Court has rightly taken cognizance as against accused Nos.1 and 2 alone and ordered for registering of the case. Therefore, the petition with the prayer to take cognizance as against remaining accused also is not tenable and as - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38355 CRL.P No. 5917 of 2023 such the petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly the following: ORDER (i) Petition filed by the complainant under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby rejected. (ii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial court through e-mail. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31