- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8006 CRL.P No. 102789 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102789 OF 2024 (482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: SHRI NAGESH S/O. GANAPPA NAIK, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: CONTRACTOR, R/O. RAJATHGERI, PRABHATA NAGAR, HONNAVAR, DIST. U.K-581334. …PETITIONER (BY SHRI LINGESH V. KATTEMANI, AND SHRI S. G. KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH BHATKAL RURAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. 2. PASCAL SANTYAG GOMES AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC: ELECTRICIAN, R/O. SAGAR ROAD, BHATKAL-581 20, U.K. DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SHRI D. J. NAIK, ADV. FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.528 OF BNSS, 2023, (U/S.482 OF CR.P.C,) SEEKING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.959/2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BHATKAL FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.143, 147, 341, 323, 506 R/W. SECTION 149 OF IPC, REGISTERED BY THE BHATKAL RURAL POLICE STATION CRIME NO.67/2023 AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.6 BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8006 CRL.P No. 102789 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. Lingesh V. Kattemane, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Abhishek Malipatil, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 – State and Sri. D.J. Naik, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioner – accused No.6 has filed this petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Section 482 of Cr.P.C.) to quash the entire proceedings in C.C. No.959/2023 pending on the file of learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Bhatkal for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: On 12.06.2023 at around 2:30 p.m., while the first informant was on his way from his house in Bhatkal to his house in Mundalli, all the accused persons, having formed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8006 CRL.P No. 102789 of 2024 an unlawful assembly, committed rioting, wrongfully restrained him, picked a quarrel with him, and voluntarily caused hurt using their hands and legs. They also intentionally insulted him with the intent to provoke a breach of peace and made criminal intimidations to eliminate him. Consequently, a complaint was lodged, leading to the registration of an FIR and initiation of investigation. Taking exception to the same, the petitioner – accused No.6 has filed this petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner – accused No.6 submits that the first informant has made general and omnibus allegations against the petitioner and others. The ingredients made under Sections 143, 147, 341, 323, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC would not attract. The charge sheet material does not disclose the commission of offence. Hence, cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is without any substance. Accordingly, the learned counsel prayed for allowing the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8006 CRL.P No. 102789 of 2024 5. Learned HCGP for respondent No.1 – State contended that the charge sheet materials clearly disclose the commission of aforesaid offences and the veracity of allegation against the petitioner can be considered only after a full-fledged trial. Moreover, the present petition has been filed at the stage when the Court took cognizance and issued process, whereas the trial Court framed charges against the accused and now the matter is set down for trial. At this juncture, the petition is not maintainable and once charge is framed, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., is not maintainable. Hence, the learned HCGP prayed for rejection of petition. 6. Perused the materials available on record. 7. The alleged offence occurred on 12.06.2023, and the complaint was lodged on the same day. According to Column No.17 of the charge sheet, all the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly, committed rioting, wrongfully restrained the first informant, picked a quarrel - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8006 CRL.P No. 102789 of 2024 with him, assaulted him using their hands and legs, intentionally insulted him with the intent to provoke a breach of peace, and made criminal intimidations to eliminate him. This petition was filed on 21.08.2024. As per the order sheet maintained by the trial Court, on 22.07.2024, the Trial Court framed charges against accused persons and the matter is set-down for trial. This aspect is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, the framing of charges signifies that the Court, after perusing charge sheet material, believes that there is sufficient reason to proceed with trial. 8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in several judgments held that once charges are framed and if the matter is set- down for trial, Courts must slow in quashing the criminal proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., or the Court’s generally reluctant to interfere with the trial process after charges have been framed, unless there are exceptional circumstances. In this case, the accused disputing the question of fact. This Court cannot delve - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8006 CRL.P No. 102789 of 2024 into disputed question of facts, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. In the instant case, the matter is set down for trial. Hence, there is no merit in this petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE Rsh /ct-an List no.: 1 sl no.: 54