- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1103 CRL.P No. 101669 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101669 OF 2023 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. 1A. PAYAGOUDA S/O APPASAB PATIL, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS., SMT. SUNITA W/O PAYAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: CHIKKODI, TALUK, CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1B. MAHINDRAKUMAR S/O PAYAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: CHIKKODI, TALUK, CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1C. JAYADEEP S/O PAYAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: CHIKKODI, TALUK, CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVARAJ P. MUDHOL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH ATHANI POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH AT DHARWAD, DIST: DHARWAD-580 007. 2. KALAGOUDA S/O APPASAB PATIL, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GALATAGA, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 201. B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.23 11:46:58 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1103 CRL.P No. 101669 of 2023 3. YASHHVANT APPASAB PATIL, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GALATAGA, TQ: NIPPANI DIST: BELAGAVI-591 201. 4. PRAKASH S/O APPASAB PATIL, AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GALATAGA, TQ: NIPPANI DIST: BELAGAVI-591 201. 5. KEERTISAGAR KALAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GALATAGA, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 201. 6. INDURAO S/O DATTU MANE, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GALATAGA, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 7. PARSWANATH SURENDRA CHOUGALA, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GALATAGA, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 201. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R1; SRI. SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R4 TO R7; R3-SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYIING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 15.02.2023 IN CHIKKODI P.S. CRIME NO.40/2022 FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/SEC. 109, 120B, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT CHIKKODI AND TO REJECT THE B REPORT AND TO ACCEPT THE PROTEST PETITION AND TO TAKE COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO 6 BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1103 CRL.P No. 101669 of 2023 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner lodged an FIR for offences punishable under Sections 109, 120B, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), alleging that accused Nos. 1 to 6, in connivance with one another, created a forged memorandum of partition deed in the petitioner’s name by forging his signature and thereby falsely showing that the petitioner had relinquished his rights in the joint family property. 2. After investigation, the police submitted a ‘B’ report stating that a civil suit concerning the subject property is pending between the parties in O.S. No. 29/2021, in which the petitioner is also a party. The subject memorandum of partition is part of the pending civil suit. 3. Challenging the ‘B’ report, the petitioner filed a protest petition, contending that while the civil suit is pending, it does not absolve the accused of criminal liability. The learned Magistrate, after recording the sworn statement of the complainant, passed the impugned order accepting the ‘B’ report submitted by the police. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed the present petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 5. A perusal of the ‘B’ report indicates that a civil suit in O.S. No. 29/2021 is pending regarding the subject property, and the memorandum of partition is under consideration in the said suit. The dispute between the parties appears to be civil in nature. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1103 CRL.P No. 101669 of 2023 However, the petitioner, in the protest petition, argued that the pendency of a civil suit does not absolve the accused of criminal liability, particularly when they have allegedly forged the complainant’s signature to show that he relinquished his rights in the subject property. 6. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in Crl.P. No. 7585/2021, disposed of on 24.05.2023, ruled that merely because a transaction appears to be civil in nature, criminal proceedings should not be stifled if the complaint and FIR make out the alleged offences. It further held that the pendency of civil proceedings between the parties is not a “license to commit an offence.” 7. The learned Magistrate, in the present case, was required to examine the material before passing the impugned order. While the Magistrate recorded the sworn statement of the complainant, the acceptance of the ‘B’ report by rejecting the protest petition is contrary to the guidelines laid down in Dr. Ravikumar vs. Mrs. K.M.C. Vasantha. 8. The impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate, accepting the ‘B’ report and rejecting the protest petition, is not legally sustainable in light of the guidelines issued in Dr. Ravikumar’s case. Accordingly, the impugned order warrants interference. 9. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1103 CRL.P No. 101669 of 2023 ORDER a) The petition is allowed. b) The impugned order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikodi on the ‘B’ report submitted by Chikodi Police in Crime No.40/2022 is hereby set-aside. c) The learned Magistrate is directed to re-consider the protest petition filed by the petitioner after providing an opportunity of hearing to the complainant and pass appropriate order in accordance with law strictly by following guidelines issued by this Court in Dr.Ravikumar’s case supra. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 64