- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10135 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. NIKHIL MOHAN AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS SON OF N. MOHAN 2. MOHAN .N AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS SON OF LATE N. NAGABHUSHANAPPA 3. LAKSHMI .K AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS WIFE OF N. MOHAN 4. SHRUTHI M. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS W/O DR. SANJAY .N PETITIONERS NO. 1 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO.404, PANCHVATHI 4TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, 1ST STAGE LV DENTAL SQUARE, H.B.R.LAYOUT KALYAN NAGAR POST BANGALORE-560 043. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VISWESWARAIAH .S, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY GOVINDAAPURA POLICE STATION BANGALORE REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560 001. 2. DR. SANJAY N. S/O G. NARAYANA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS NO.56, PADMASHREE NILAYA 3RD BLOCK, 1ST CROSS DODDABOMMASANDRA VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU - 560097. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; V/O/D 13.08.2025, SRI. M. VINAYA KEERTHY, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4 IN CC NO.59490/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XI ACJM, MAYO HALL UNIT, BANGALORE FOR THE O/P/U/S 318(4), 324(2), 329(2), 351(2), 352 R/W 3(5) OF THE BNS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE A BY ALLOWING THE PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The captioned petition is filed by the in-laws, brother-in-law and wife of respondent No.2/complainant seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in C.C.59490/25 for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 324(2), 329(2), 351(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023. 2. The facts leading to the case are as under: Respondent No.2 lodged the complaint with the jurisdictional police station that he is married to respondent No.4 and he is a doctor by profession. The complainant has further alleged that upon request of Petitioner No.2/father-in- law, he has invested a sum of Rs.90 Lakhs for construction of two storied buildings and despite his repeated request his father-in-law is yet to return the hand-loan availed. It is alleged that petitioner No.1/brother-in-law has barged into the clinic repeatedly threatening the complainant and the staff to vacate the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 premises and has damaged the CCTV Camera, clinic board, thereby, he has sustained a loss of Rs.2 Lakhs. Hence, a crime is registered and the investigating Officer has laid the charge sheet. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/complainant and the learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1/State. 4. Though, respondent No.2/complainant alleges that he has paid Rs.90 Lakhs to his father-in-law, the affidavit-cum-declaration produced by the petitioners followed by receipt dated 9.9.2024 and the lease deed executed by Petitioner No.2/father-in-law in favour of respondent No.2/son-in-law clearly clinches the issue on hand and these documents disclose that the dispute is between the in-laws and respondent No.2 and the marital discord between the complainant and Petitioner No.4/wife - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 has further escalated the dispute leading to registration of crime at the instance of son-in-law. 5. The edifice on which this complaint is registered by the son-in-law is that he has paid a sum of Rs.90 Lakhs to his father-in-law. Therefore, it would be apposite for this Court to extract paragraphs 2 and 3 of the alleged affidavit-cum-declaration on which the petitioners are placing reliance, which reads as under: "2. I am the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the land bearing No.404, 4th Main, 4th Block, 1st Stage, HBR Layout, Bangalore- 560053, measuring 40 x 60 square feet. While I have constructing a house on the said land my son-in-law Sanjay Narayanamurthy has invested a sum of amount towards the construction of the first and the second floors on the aforesaid land, further I have received a sum of Rs.46,50,000-00 (Rupees Forty Six lakhs fifty thousand only) by way of cash, as hand loan, towards the aforesaid construction. 3. I further hereby declare and confirm that after four month I hereby agree that I will execute necessary deeds in giving 50% of the aforesaid property into the name of my daughter Smt.Shruthi.M, wife of Sanjay Narayanamurthy, as her share in the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 aforesaid property. Further I hereby declare and confirm that I will return/repay the aforesaid hand loan of Rs.46,50,000-00 in favour of my son-in-law Sanjay Narayanamurthy within four months from this date." 6. The petitioners also allege that the hand loan availed by father-in-law from son-in-law is repaid as per the affidavit-cum-declaration. The details of payment are through cheques therefore, this Court deems it fit to extract the receipt, which reads as under: "RECEIPT Date: 09-09-2024 I. DR.SANJAY NARAYANA MURTHY, (Mobile 9986336507) have received an amount of Rs. 46,50,000/- (RUPEES FORTY SIX LAKHS FIFTY THOUSAND ONLY) from N. MOHAN, my Father-in-Law, Residing at No.56, Padmashree, Nilaya, 1st Block, Doddabommasandra, Bangalore-560097 by way of following Cheques bearing Vidyaranyapura, Bangalore North, Numbers:- 1) Ch. No.084697 for Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) dated 10-09-2024 drawn on Karnataka Bank Limited, HBR Layout Branch, Bangalore. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 2) Ch.No.084698 for Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) dated 10-09-2024 drawn on Karnataka Bank Limited, HBR Layout Branch, Bangalore. 3) Ch.No.084699 for Rs.26,50,000/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) dated 10-09-2024 drawn on Karnataka Bank Limited, HBR Layout Branch, Bangalore. I have received the said amount with regard to the Affidavit Cum Declaration entered between myself and my father in law on 13th May 2024 as per that Affidavit, I have received the above entire amount of Rs. 46,50,000/-(Rupees Forty Six Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) By this receipt, I declare that I do not have any other Claims against my father-in-law hereafter." 7. On examining the rental agreement, father-in- law inducted his son-in-law who is a doctor in the ground floor and complainant is running a clinic which is factually admitted by the complainant during the course of arguments. This complaint is lodged on the premise that his father-in- law/petitioner No.2 and brother-in- law/petitioner No.1 have failed to return hand loan of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 Rs.90 lakhs availed by them while putting up construction. Therefore, the complainant alleges cheating and mischief by the in-laws. The culled out portions supra narrate a contrary story. On reading the culled out portions, what emerges is that there is a dispute between father-in-law and son-in-law in regard to investment relating to construction of a two storied building. While complainant alleges that he has paid Rs.90 lakhs to father-in-law, the records relied on by the father-in-law reveal that he has received hand loan of Rs.46 Lakhs and the amount is returned through cheques, which is evidenced from the receipts. Therefore, the dispute essentially is civil in nature insofar as cheating and mischief is concerned. 8. The son-in-law has alleged criminal intimidation and damage to CCTV and the sign board of clinic. Records disclose that there is a marital discord between complainant and his wife/petitioner No.4 and the son-in- law/complainant has moved out despite securing lease from father-in-law. The father-in-law asserts that the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 CCTV is installed by him and the charge sheet materials does not disclose that the investigating Officer has adverted to the ownership of the CCTV. The charge sheet material also does not advert to the damages to the sign board of the clinic. Even otherwise the fact that the two families are at logger head and there is some degree of bitterness and acrimony between husband and wife which has now dragged the in-laws also, this Court is of the view that the dispute is essentially civil in nature insofar as father-in-law and son-in-law are concerned, while the dispute between the petitioner No.4 and complainant is essentially a family dispute concerning the marital discord between the husband and wife. 9. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the continuation of criminal proceedings despite investigating Officer laying a charge sheet may amount to abuse of process, if these proceedings are allowed to continue. Any bleak chance of reunion between petitioner No.4 and complainant may further get affected if these criminal - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38076 CRL.P No. 10135 of 2025 proceedings are allowed to continue. The charge sheet materials even otherwise do not disclose the commission of offence and therefore, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence to the petitioners. 10. For the reasons stated supra, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The criminal petition is allowed. (ii) The proceedings pending in CC.No.59490/2025 on the file of the XI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 324(2), 329(2), 351(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023 are hereby quashed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73