- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5748 CRL.P No. 101597 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101597 OF 2020 BETWEEN: SMT. VIDYA D. W/O. DURGAPRASAD, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: LAW PRACTITIONER, R/O: SSBR SCHOOL, S.B. NAGAR, GANGAVATHI, TQ: GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL – 583 227. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RESHMA MADIWALAR, ADVOCATE APPEARED FOR SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH KUSHTAGI POLICE STATION, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL, REPRESENTED BY S.P.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD – 580 011. 2. SRI. BASAVARAJ S/O. ADAPPA IDLAPUR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE, R/O: NARINAL, TQ: KUSHTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL – 583 277. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; SRI RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET AND PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.32/2018 ON THE FILE OF DISTRICT AND SESSIONS AT KOPPAL, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 323, 307, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 IS CONCERNED. PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER/S AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEM FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5748 CRL.P No. 101597 of 2020 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by accused No.2 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the chargesheet and proceedings in SC No.32/2018 pending on the file of District and Sessions Judge, Koppal, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. The case of the prosecution as contained in the chargesheet is that on 03.10.2017 at about 3:30 PM parking of motorcycle by accused No.1 in front of the main entrance of the Court building at Kushtagi, has caused inconvenience to the movement of the clients. Therefore, CW.1 (respondent No.2) asked accused No.1 not to park the motorcycle in a zig-zag manner and asked him to shift his motorcycle, at that time, accused No.1 abused the respondent No.2 in a filthy words and slapped on his cheek and kicked on his stomach. At that time, the accused No.2-petitioner came - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5748 CRL.P No. 101597 of 2020 to the spot and abated accused No.1 to finish the respondent No.2, since he had removed her from the membership when he was the President of Bar Association. Accused No.1 took the hand kerchief with an intention to kill the respondent No.2, put the hand kerchief around the neck of respondent No.2 and both the accused Nos.1 and 2 pulled the hand kerchief so as to strangulate the respondent No.2. At that time, on hearing the sound of respondent No.2, CW.4 to 11 came and rescued the respondent No.2. At that time, when the accused No.1 told him that he will finish him in the Court premises by using the chopper. The offences alleged against the petitioner- accused No.2 and accused No.1 in the chargesheet are offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC. On the basis of the chargesheet, a case came to be registered in SC No.32/2018 pending on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Koppal, the said proceedings are sought to be quashed against the accused No.2-petitioner. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5748 CRL.P No. 101597 of 2020 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner- accused No.2 and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1-State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No.2 would contend that the incident has taken place on 03.10.2017 at about 3:30 PM and the complaint has been filed on 04.10.2017 at about 5:30 PM and there is a delay in filing the complaint. The eye-witnesses in the said case are the followers of respondent No.2. There was a grudge by the respondent No.2 against the petitioner-accused No.2 as she has filed a complaint against him. With this, he prayed to allow the petition. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that the incident has taken place in front of main entrance of the building of Court. CW.4 to 14 are the eye- witnesses to the alleged incident and they are the practising lawyers. Respondent No.2 is the complainant and the victim. The statement of eye-witnesses supports - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5748 CRL.P No. 101597 of 2020 the accusation made in the chargesheet. Merely because, no injury has been sustained by the respondent No.2, the proceedings cannot be quashed since, the incident has been witnessed by the several lawyers. There are no grounds made out for quashing the proceedings. With this, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1-State has reiterated the grounds urged by the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and submits that the hand kerchief used by the accused persons has been seized under a Mahazar and prayed for dismissal of the petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused the chargesheet and the other materials placed on record. The accusation against this petitioner- accused No.2 is that when there was a quarrel between the accused No.1 and respondent No.2 (CW.1), she went and told the accused No.1 to finish the respondent No.2 as he had removed her from the membership of the Bar - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5748 CRL.P No. 101597 of 2020 Association when he was the President of the Bar Association and both of them, with a hand kerchief tried to strangulate him and CW.4 to 11 came and rescued the respondent No.2. On perusal of the chargesheet, CW.4 to 14 are cited as eye-witnesses. Their statements make out offences alleged against this petitioner-accused No.2 at column No.17 of the chargesheet. Merely because, there is one day delay and respondent No.2 has not sustained any external injury, is not a ground for quashing the proceedings. The petitioner-accused No.2 has not made out any ground for quashing the proceedings as sought for. In the result, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE PJ/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29