- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 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 CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101876 OF 2024 (482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LATA W/O. SHIVAYOGI AKKUR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. H.NO 32, NEAR SUB JAIL CROSS, VISHWESHWAR NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032. 2. SHIVAYOGI S/O. KOTRAPPA AKKUR, AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: LEGAL PRACTITIONER, R/O. H.NO 32, NEAR SUB JAIL CROSS, VISHWESHWAR NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032. 3. SMT. ANUMAPA D/O. SHIVAYOGI AKKUR, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: LEGAL PRACTITIONER, R/O. H.NO 32, NEAR SUB JAIL CROSS, Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 VISHWESHWAR NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032. …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI B. G. INDI, ADV. FOR SHRI K. L. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH HUBBALLI ASHOKNAGAR POLICE STATION, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH-580011. 2. SMT. AKKAMAHADEVI W/O. VIRUPAKSHAPPA NANDI, AGE: 82 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. H. NO.32, RAJ NAGAR, VISHWESHWAR NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SHRI SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLLI, ADV. FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE CHARGE-SHEET SUBMITTED IN ASHOKNAGAR P.S. CRIME NO.05/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.506, 504, 448 R/W. SECTION 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF JMFC-I COURT, HUBBALLI AND ALSO QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF JMFC-I COURT, HUBBALLI IN C.C.NO. 422/2024 FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.506, 504, 448 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard Sri B.G.Indi., learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt.Kirtilatha Patil., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1- State and Sri. Shivaraj Balloli., learned counsel for respondent No.2 – State. 2. The petitioners – accused has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., [582 of BNSS, 2023], praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.422/2024, pending on the file of JMFC-I Court, Hubballi in connection with Ashoknagar Police Station Crime No.5/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’). 3. Brief facts of the prosecution case is as under: The de facto complainant-Smt.Akkamahadevi Nandi is the owner of land bearing House No.32 situated at - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 Rajanagara Vishweshwaranagara, Hubballi. On 08.01.2024 at about 07:15 p.m, the complainant lodged complaint against her daughter-Lata Akkur, son-in-law - Shivayogi Akkur and daughter-in-law i.e, Anupama Akkur, who were accused Nos.1 to 3 respectively, alleging that on 04.01.2024 at 6:30 p.m, accused Nos.1 to 3 were trespassed the house of the de facto complainant and insisted her to give share of accused No.1 and also to give gold articles; they also made criminal intimidation to eliminate her if she has not make partition in the property. Thus, the petitioners abused the complainant and intentionally insulted her to provoke her breach of peace. Hence, the de facto complainant lodged complaint, which led to registration of FIR and initiation of investigation. 4. The Investigating Officer conducted investigation and filed the charge-sheet. The trial Court soon after receipt of the charge-sheet, took cognizance of the offences under Section 190(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C., and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 issued process against the petitioners. Taking exception to the same, the petitioners have filed this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the allegation made against the petitioners is afterthought so as to falsely implicate them, there is delay of four days in lodging the complaint, but delay has not been properly explained by the complainant, the dispute is with regard to partition of the property. Hence, he prayed to allow the petition. 6. Learned High Court Government Pleader contended that there is prima-facie material against the petitioner to attract the provisions of IPC. The petitioners intentionally insulted the complainant to provoke her breach of peace and also made criminal intimidation to eliminate her and they trespassed house of the de facto complainant. Hence, she prayed to dismiss the petition. 7. On perusal of the complaint, wherein, the complainant made allegations that on 04.01.2024, these - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 petitioners trespassed the house of the de facto complainant; abused the complainant and intentionally insulted her to provoke her breach of peace and made criminal intimidation to eliminate her. 8. As per the FIR and charge-sheet material, the alleged incident occurred in the house. It is not the case of the informant that there was any member of the public (not merely relatives or friends) at the time of the incident in the house. Therefore, the basic ingredient that the words were uttered “in any place within public view” is not made out. In the list of witnesses appended to the charge- sheet, certain witnesses are named but it could not be said that those were the persons present within the four walls of the building. The offence is alleged to have taken place within the four walls of the building. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Swaran Singh and Others v. State through standing counsel and Another, reported in (2008) 8 SCC 435, it cannot be said to be a place within public view as none - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 was said to be present within the four walls of the building as per the FIR and/or charge-sheet. Therefore, offence under Section 504 of IPC is not established. 9. As per the contents of charge-sheet and contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and the de facto complainant, it appears that there is a civil dispute between the parties. Accused No.1 has instituted a civil suit for partition against the de facto complainant, so also the son of de facto complainant filed a suit for eviction of accused No.1. Thus, litigation between the parties is purely civil in nature and there was a civil litigation between the complainant and accused No.1, however, the de facto complainant has been given this a criminal texture, so as to circumvent the petitioners from claiming share in the schedule property from the de facto complainant. Hence, the continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, the following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8095 CRL.P No. 101876 of 2024 ORDER i) The criminal petition is allowed. ii) The impugned entire criminal proceedings in C.C.No.422/2024, pending on the file of JMFC-I Court, Hubballi in connection with Ashoknagar Police Station Crime No.5/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, is hereby quashed. iii) In view of disposal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE AM/- CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39