- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36598 CRL.P No. 12621 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12621 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. YASHASWINI K C W/O PATHIK H C AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT HALEHALLI VILLAGE, B HOSAHALLI POST KASTURUMANE VILLAGE, JAKKANAHALLI POST BANAKAL HOBLI, VASTARE, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 560125 2. REKHA G M W/O CHANDRASHEKAR K T AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT HALEHALLI VILLAGE, B HOSAHALLI POST KASTURUMANE VILLAGE, JAKKANAHALLI POST BANAKAL HOBLI, VASTARE, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 560125 3. GRANTHANA K C D/O CHANDRASHEKAR K T AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT HALEHALLI VILLAGE, B HOSAHALLI POST KASTURUMANE VILLAGE, JAKKANAHALLI POST Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36598 CRL.P No. 12621 of 2025 BANAKAL HOBLI, VASTARE, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 560125 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR B N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE BY BANAKAL P S REP. BY SPP HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560001 2. SMT. MYTHRI W/O LATE CHIDAMBARA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS R/AT HALEHALLI, B HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 560125 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAHUL RAI, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO.1076/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MUDIGERE U/S 352, 115(2), 351(2), 324(2) R/W 3(5) OF BNS 2023 OF THE BANAKAL POLICE STATION AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE SAID PROCEEDINGS AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER : - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36598 CRL.P No. 12621 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Learned HCGP is directed to accept notice for respondent No.1. 2. This petition arises out of the alleged incident dated 05.07.2024. 3. In view of the scuffle that is alleged to have taken place on 05.07.2024 between the petitioners and respondent No.2-the de facto complainant, two separate crimes came to be registered in respect of the said incident. Upon completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has laid charge sheets in both cases. The petitioners are presently facing trial in C.C. No.1076/2025 for offences punishable under Sections 352, 115(2), 351(2), 324(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 4. The petitioners, while challenging the proceedings, have sought to rely on the wound certificates pertaining to petitioner Nos.1 and 3, asserting that both of them had sustained injuries and were admitted to the hospital on the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36598 CRL.P No. 12621 of 2025 very date of the alleged occurrence, i.e., 05.07.2024. According to them, this circumstance probabilises their version that they were the victims of an assault rather than aggressors and that the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 is frivolous and motivated. It is contended that the complaint is nothing but a counterblast to the earlier complaint lodged by the petitioners in respect of the same incident. 5. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader, while opposing the petition, has placed strong reliance on the charge sheet material. It is submitted that the investigation has revealed prima facie evidence supporting the allegations made by respondent No.2, and that the mere existence of cross-cases cannot, by itself, be a ground to quash the proceedings at the threshold. 6. On a careful perusal of the charge sheet and the material collected during investigation, this Court finds that the respondent No.2-complainant was examined by CW.15, and a wound certificate was issued indicating that she had also sustained injuries in the course of the scuffle. Significantly, while filing the present petition, the petitioners have not chosen - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36598 CRL.P No. 12621 of 2025 to place on record the wound certificate relating to respondent No.2, though it forms part of the charge sheet material produced by the Investigating Officer. The deliberate withholding of such crucial evidence, which demonstrates that the complainant had also suffered injuries, calls for an adverse inference against the petitioners. It lends support to the prosecution version that the complainant was not an aggressor alone but had sustained injuries attributable to the occurrence. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the present case and the connected matter are clearly case and counter-case arising out of the very same incident. The occurrence of the incident, therefore, is not in dispute. In such a situation, the only issue that requires adjudication is as to who was the aggressor and who acted in self-defence, which necessarily entails appreciation of evidence. Since the Investigating Officer has already completed the investigation and filed charge sheets in both matters, this Court is of the considered view that the truth or otherwise of the rival versions can only be determined during trial, and this is not a fit case to exercise inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings at this stage. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36598 CRL.P No. 12621 of 2025 7. For the foregoing reasons, the petition stands dismissed. It is, however, made clear that any observations made in this order are confined to the adjudication of the present petition and shall not influence the trial Court while deciding the matter on merits. Any pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47