- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1094 CRL.P No. 101181 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101181 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: MADDILETTI B S/O. B. CHINCHAIA, AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT, (REVENUE OFFICER), R/O. SIRIGERI VILLAGE, SIRUGUPPA TQ., BALLARI DIST-583120. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUHAS HOSAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. J. BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH TAKKALAKOTE, (P.S. CR. NO.132/2019), R/BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD-580011. 2. T. RAJENDRA DHORE, S/O. LATE T. RAMANJINEPPA, AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. REVENUE INSPECTOR, TEKKALAKOTE-583120, SIRUGUPPA TQ., BALLARI DIST. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1 & R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO, QUASH IMPUGNED COMPLAINT DATED 03.11.2019 LODGED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND SUBSEQUENT REGISTRATION OF IMPUGNED FIR IN CRIME NO.132/2019 DATED 21.12.2019 AT TEKKALKOTA POLICE STATION AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND SUBSEQUENT FILING OF THE CHARGE SHEET DATED 11.10.2021 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AS PER B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.25 12:19:30 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1094 CRL.P No. 101181 of 2024 ANNEXURE-C AND CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER OF COGNIZANCE ORDER DATED 12.10.2021 BY REGISTERING A CRIMINAL CASE IN CC NO.1814/2021 AND ISSUANCE OF PROCESS AGAINST THE ACCUSED PERSONS INCLUDING PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5 IN CONCERNED PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, SIRUGUPPA AS PER ANNEXURE-D FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 192(a), 192(b) OF KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE (AMENDMENT) ACT AND U/S 201 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner/accused No. 5 has been charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 192-A and 192-B of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964. 2. The prosecution’s case is that accused Nos. 1 to 3, by impersonating one Tekkalakote, whose name appeared in the Record of Rights concerning the subject land, executed a registered sale deed in their favor in 2010. Following the registration of the sale deed, accused No. 4, a Revenue Inspector, and accused No. 5, a Village Accountant, allegedly connived with accused Nos. 1 to 3 and mutated their names in the Record of Rights for the said land. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No. 5 argues that the execution of the sale deed by impersonation pertains to accused Nos. 1 to 3, and accused No. 5, while discharging his duties as a Village Accountant, merely recommended the mutation of names of accused Nos. 1 to 3 in the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1094 CRL.P No. 101181 of 2024 Record of Rights. Therefore, in the absence of any material evidence suggesting that accused No. 5 connived with accused Nos. 1 to 3 in creating the fraudulent sale deed, the continuation of criminal proceedings against accused No. 5 would constitute an abuse of the process of law. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State argued that accused No. 5, despite knowing that accused Nos. 1 to 3 had created a fraudulent sale deed, connived with them and recommended the mutation of their names in the Record of Rights. It was further argued that the veracity of these allegations should be tested at trial and not at this stage, and hence, sought dismissal of the petition. 5. After considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the following observations are made: 6. The prosecution’s case concerns land bearing Sy. No. 189, measuring 13.48 acres, situated in Sirigeri village, with its Record of Rights standing in the name of Tekkalakote. 7. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 allegedly impersonated Tekkalakote and executed a registered sale deed in their favor on 10.08.2009. 8. Following this sale deed, accused Nos. 1 to 3 applied to the Revenue Authorities to mutate their names in the Record of Rights. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1094 CRL.P No. 101181 of 2024 9. The Deputy Commissioner, upon taking suo motu cognizance, set aside the mutation entries via an order dated 31.10.2019, stating that the land in question belonged to Tekkalakote Town and was government land. 10. The Deputy Commissioner’s order further observed that accused Nos. 1 to 3 had impersonated Tekkalakote (or Thekkalakoteppa) to obtain the registered sale deed fraudulently. 11. Chapter XI of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964, governs the Record of Rights. Under Section 128, the acquisition of rights under a registered conveyance deed must be reported to the revenue authorities within three months of registration. As per Section 129, the prescribed officer must enter the details in the Register of Mutations upon receipt of such a report. 12. In this case, the Village Accountant (accused No. 5) was obligated to recommend the mutation of the names of accused Nos. 1 to 3, who had acquired rights under the registered sale deed. His actions were in conformity with Section 129 of the Act. The Village Accountant was not required to investigate the genuineness of the sale deed, as that responsibility does not fall within his duties. 13. The prosecution’s allegation that accused No. 5 knowingly connived with accused Nos. 1 to 3 in the creation of a fraudulent sale deed and abetted the mutation process lacks substance. Therefore, continuing criminal proceedings against accused No. 5 would constitute an abuse of the process of law. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1094 CRL.P No. 101181 of 2024 ORDER i) Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. ii) The criminal proceedings in C.C. No.1814/2021 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Siruguppa, insofar as it relates to petitioner/accused No.5, is hereby quashed. iii) The Trial Court shall proceed against accused Nos.1 to 3 in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the observations made in the order, and any observations made is only for the purpose of disposal of this petition. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE KMS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62