Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45315 (KAR)

RAJESHA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/13338/2023 · 2025-02-24

S R Krishna Kumar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8196 CRL.P No. 13338 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13338 OF 2023 BETWEEN: RAJESHA S/O BHADRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT SANENAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-01 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRATHEEP K C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY BELUR POLICE STATION, HASSAN DISTRICT, REP BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-01. 2. POORNESHA S/O HALAPPA GOWDA, MAJOR, R/AT SANENAHALLI VILLAGE, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-01. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI A.N. GANGADHARAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.11.2023 IN S.C.NO.34/2019 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL JUDGE AT HASSAN AND DISCHARGE THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.143,147,148,504,114,307,324,323, 506, 326,149 OF IPC BY BELUR POLICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8196 CRL.P No. 13338 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following relief: "Set aside the impugned order dated 10-1-2023 in S.C.No.34/2019 passed by the additional district & sessions judge & special Judge at Hassan and discharge the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 114, 307, 324, 323, 506, 323, 149 of IPC by Belur Police." 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that a complaint was filed by the uncle of the petitioner on 14.10.2017 between 3:45 p.m and 4:45 p.m against respondent No.2 - defacto complainant in the present case. Subsequently, respondent No.2 filed a counter complaint against the petitioner at about 6:00 p.m., which was registered as an FIR in Crime No.371/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 114, 307, 324, 323, 506, 149 of IPC. Subsequently, the respondent No.1 - police having filed a charge sheet, the same is pending before the trial Court in S.C.No.34/2019 in which, the petitioner is arraigned as accused No.7. 4. In the aforesaid proceedings, the petitioner - accused No.7 filed an application seeking discharge under Section 227 of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8196 CRL.P No. 13338 of 2023 Cr.P.C, which was rejected by the trial Court vide impugned order dated 10.11.2023, aggrieved by which, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 5. A perusal of the material on record and the impugned order will indicate that the trial Court has rejected the discharge application filed by the petitioner on the ground that there are certain allegations made against the petitioner. However, the trial Court failed to consider and appreciate that prior to the respondent No.2 filing the instant complaint against the petitioner, the petitioner's uncle - accused No.2 in the instant case had already filed a complaint against respondent No.2 on the very same thereby indicating that the present complaint filed by respondent No.2 is clearly a counterblast to the complaint filed by the petitioner's uncle - accused No.2. 6. It is also pertinent to note that except vague, bald and omnibus allegations, necessary ingredients constituting the aforesaid offences are not forthcoming in the impugned complaint as against the petitioner. Under these circumstances, the trial Court clearly misdirected itself in rejecting the application for discharge filed by the petitioner by passing the impugned order, which deserve to be quashed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8196 CRL.P No. 13338 of 2023 7. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The petition is hereby allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 10.11.2023 in S.C.No.34/2019 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, Hassan qua the petitioner is hereby set aside. iii. The application filed by the petitioner – accused No.7 under Section 227 of Cr.P.C for discharge is hereby allowed. iv. The petitioner – accused No.7 is directed to be discharged in S.C.No.34/2019 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions and Special Judge, Hassan for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 114, 307, 324, 323, 506, 326 read with Section 149 of IPC Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE RB