- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T WRIT PETITION NO. 103253 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. VEERUPAXI S/O. MAHABALESH HURADADLI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS. 2. VIJAYJKUMAR K. S/O. BASAVARAJ MEDIKINAL REDDY, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS. 3. SHIVARAJ S/O. SHARANEGOUDA KALAMANGI REDDY, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS. 4. SRISHAIL S/O. MAHABALESH HURAKADLI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS. 5. RAGHUNATHREDDY S/O. NARAYANAPPA MULIMANI, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, ALL ARE R/O. KARATAGI TALUK, Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 DIST. KOPPAL, PIN-583229. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SADIQ N. GOODWALA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENCH AT DHARWAD, THROUGH KUSHTAGI POLICE STATION, DIST. KOPPAL-583229. 2. MALLESH S/O. NINGAPPA MEGURA, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. J. P. NAGAR, KARATAGI, DIST. KOPAL-583229. …RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SHRI HANUMANTHREDDY SAHUKAR, ADV. FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, R/W. SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C, PRAYING TO A WRIT IN A NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE FIR IN CRIME NO.62/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 115(2) 127 (2), 352, 351, 190 OF BNS 2023 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 VIDE ANNEXURE –A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri. Sadiq N. Goodwala, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri. Abhishek Malipatil, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 – State and Sri. Hanumanthreddy Sahukar, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the FIR in Crime No.62/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 127(2), 352, 351, 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as under: On 06.03.2025 at 08:30 p.m., the first informant lodged a complaint against the accused, alleging that on 18.01.2025 at around 05:30 p.m., the accused took the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 informant and his wife to the Sub-Registrar’s Office at Kushtagi. There, without the knowledge or consent of the first informant and his wife, the accused obtained their signatures on a sale deed, without paying any sale consideration, the accused unlawfully got transferred the ownership of a plot—originally registered in the name of the first informant into his own name. Thereafter, the accused wrongfully confined the first informant in a car bearing registration No.KA-37/N-6807, abused him using filthy language, physically assaulted him, and made criminal intimidation to eliminate him. As a result, the first informant lodged the present complaint. Taking exception to the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent, have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the first informant has made general and omnibus allegations against the petitioners. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 Accordingly, the learned counsel prayed for allowing the petition. 5. Learned HCGP for respondent No.1 – State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that the petitioners are responsible for wrongfully confining the first informant in a car, abusing and assaulting him and making criminal intimidation to eliminate him and as such, learned Magistrate has rightly taken cognizance of the aforesaid offence and the same does not warrant any interference. 6. Perused the materials available on record. According to the case of the de facto complainant, the petitioner transferred the complainant's property into his own name without paying any sale consideration. Although the sale deed reflects a consideration amount of Rs.25,00,000/-, the said amount was not actually paid to the de facto complainant. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 7. On 15.05.2025, this Court granted an interim stay of further proceedings in Crime No.62/2025 registered at Kushtagi Police Station. As a result, the investigation has been stalled. It appears that the de facto complainant has suffered substantial loss. Though there is a property dispute between the parties, the allegations in the complaint appear to be cognizable in nature and the first informant made serious allegation against the accused and an investigation has to be conducted. 8. In light of these serious allegations, the petition filed by the petitioners is premature and is, therefore, liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 9. However, the respondent–Police are directed not to take any coercive action against the petitioners. The Investigating Officer is at liberty to continue the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8086 WP No. 103253 of 2025 investigation strictly in accordance with law, without taking any coercive steps against the petitioners. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE Rsh /ct-an List no.: 1 sl no.: 28