- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39087 CRL.P No. 12119 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12119 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. WASEEM @ SYED WASEEM S/O SYED YASEEN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/A NO.384, (191) NEAR BILAL MASJID, K. M. COLONY SIDDAPURA, JAYANAGAR I BLOCK BANGALORE-560011. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIDYASAGAR .H.V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA SIDDAPURA POLICE STATION REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. SHABANA TAJ S/O SHAFI ULLA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/A NO.156, 5TH CROSS K. M. COLONY, SIDDAPURA JAYANAGAR I BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; MS. ABHIRAMI S. PILLAI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39087 CRL.P No. 12119 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S. 482(FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER BY SIDDAPURA POLICE STATION/RESPONDENT NO.1 PENDING IN THE FILE OF HONBLE COURT OF THE ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU (CCH-46) IN S.C.NO.311/2025 (CR.NO.128/2020) FOR THE OFFENCES P/US/ 427, 341, 307, 504, 323, 354, 506-B OF IPC AND SEC.25-1B OF ARMS ACT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by the accused seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in S.C.No.311/2025(Cr.No.128/2020) on the file of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections 427, 341, 307, 504, 323, 354, 506-B and Section 25-1B of the Arms Act. 2. Today, an application has been filed under Section 320 read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., seeking leave of this Court to permit the parties to compound the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39087 CRL.P No. 12119 of 2025 offences, as they have amicably settled the matter. Since the charge sheet indicates an offence punishable under Section 307 IPC, the learned HCGP has seriously objected to granting any indulgence under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Referring to Section 307 IPC, he contended that the parties cannot be permitted to obtain orders from this Court, as the offence is of a serious and heinous nature. 3. Though this Court was initially inclined to consider the objection raised by the learned HCGP, upon closer examination of the written complaint lodged by respondent No.2, who is the wife of the injured, it is evident that, while there is an allegation that the accused attempted to attack her husband with a machete, the complainant herself has stated that the actual assault was by hand, one strike on the lips and one on the shoulder of her husband. Both the complainant and the injured are present before this Court. On being specifically queried, the injured admitted that he was assaulted only with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39087 CRL.P No. 12119 of 2025 hands, sustaining minor injuries to the lips and shoulder, and that no other injuries were caused during the incident. 4. The parties have further submitted that the verbal scuffle arose in connection with a pending civil suit between them. They have now informed this Court that the property dispute has been amicably settled outside Court. Both respondent No.2 and her husband/accused have requested quashing of the proceedings to maintain harmony and finality in their relations. 5. Though the petitioner is charge-sheeted under Section 307 IPC, a closer examination of the complaint and the oral statements of the injured clearly indicates that the injuries sustained are simple in nature. Therefore, the offence, prima facie, falls under Section 323 IPC and not under Section 307 IPC. The materials on record do not support the commission of an offence under Section 307 IPC. The complaint exaggerates the incident, and the oral statements of the complainant and injured corroborate - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39087 CRL.P No. 12119 of 2025 that no weapon was used to cause injury. Although the Arms Act is mentioned and a machete is allegedly recovered, both the injured and the complainant have clarified that the weapon was not used in the assault. In the absence of medical or other corroborative evidence indicating a life-threatening injury, this is a fit case for quashing the proceedings. 6. In view of the amicable settlement of the property dispute and to prevent further abuse of the process of law, this Court, exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., deems it appropriate to quash the proceedings. 7. Accordingly, the following order is passed: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed. (ii) The proceedings pending in S.C. No.311/2025 (Cr. No.128/2020), for offences punishable under Sections 427, 341, 307, 504, 323, 354, 506-B of IPC and Section 25(1B) of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39087 CRL.P No. 12119 of 2025 the Arms Act, are hereby quashed till the next date of hearing. SD/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE ALB List No.: 5 Sl No.: 1