- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4890 CRL.P No. 103014 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103014 OF 2023 BETWEEN: KALLAPPA S/O. FAKKIRAPPA KURI, AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: WORKING AT PVT. COMPANY R/AT: HERIMAILIGWAD, TQ:DIST: DHARWAD – 580 005. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. YOGESH MANOHAR DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, RURAL POLICE STATION DHARWAD, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA – 580 011. 2. SHIVAPPA S/O. BHEEMAPPA ODEYAR, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/AT: HERIMAILIGWAD TQ:DIST: DHARWAD – 580 005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASH THE FIR COMPLAINANT AND CHARGE SHEET SPL. SC NO. 18/2023 BY THE DHARWAD RURAL POLICE/RESPONDENT POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SEC. 354(A) 354 (D) 506, OF IPC AND 12 OF POSCO ACT WHICH IS PENDING BEFORE THE 2ND ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE/SPECIAL COURT AT DHARWAD, AGAINST THE PETITIONER. GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT 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:4890 CRL.P No. 103014 of 2023 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 the sole accused praying to quash the FIR, complaint and the charge-sheet in Special S.C. No.18/2023 pending on the file of the learned II Additional district and Sessions Judge/Special Court, Dharwad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354A and 354B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’, for short) and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘POCSO Act’, for short). 2. The case of the prosecution as per Column 17 of the charge-sheet is that, on 21.12.2022, at about 9:00am, when the victim girl, aged about 17 years 5 months, was standing waiting for the bus, at that time, this petitioner/accused made her hand signal, raised his eye brow, made tata and forced her to love him and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4890 CRL.P No. 103014 of 2023 teased her and told her that if she does not love him, he will kill her family members and committed the offences under Sections 354A, 354B and 506 of IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. Based on the said charge-sheet, a case came to be registered against the petitioner in Special S.C. No.18/2023 pending on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Dharwad. The proceedings of the said case are sought to be quashed by the petitioner/accused. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for respondent No.1/State. Despite service of notice, respondent No.2 has remained unrepresented. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the victim girl in her statement before the Police and the statement recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has given two different versions. The father of the victim, who has filed the complaint, is not an eyewitness to the incident. The attendance register - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4890 CRL.P No. 103014 of 2023 of the petitioner issued by the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Dharwad, indicates that, he attended his duties on 21.12.2022 and therefore he was not at the spot at the time of the incident. The proceedings are initiated to take revenge against the petitioner, as he stopped working under the father of the petitioner. With this, he prayed to allow the petition. 5. Learned AGA would contend that the incident has been witnessed by 4 eyewitnesses, who are cited as CWs.5 to 8. The statement of CWs.5 to 8 establish the prosecution case. With this, he prayed for dismissal of the petition. 6. Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the charge-sheet material. 7. The specific allegation against the petitioner is that on 21.12.2022, at about 9:00am when the victim girl was waiting for the bus to go to college, at that time, the petitioner made signal by hand, raised his eye brow, made - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4890 CRL.P No. 103014 of 2023 tata and forced her to love him or otherwise, he will kill her family members. CWs.5 to 8 are eyewitnesses. The statement of the eyewitnesses support the case of the prosecution as narrated in Column 17 of the charge-sheet. Merely because the victim has given different version in her 164 Cr.P.C. statement is not a ground for quashing the proceedings. The contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner had attended his duties on 21.12.2022 and therefore, he was not on the spot, the defence of alibi, has to be taken at the trial. 8. Considering all these aspects, there are no grounds for quashing as sought for. In the result, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE Kmv CT-ASC