- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:653 CRL.P No. 102248 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102248 OF 2019 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. CHANNAPPA S/O. DEVAPPA INAMATI AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: YALISHIRUR, TQ AND DISTRICT: GADAG-582120. 2. CHANABASAPPA S/O. SHEKAPPA HONNAPPANAVAR, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALISHIRUR, TQ: AND DISTRICT: GADAG-582120. 3. VIRUPAXAPPA S/O. MALLAPPA BYALI AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALISHIRUR, TQ: AND DISTRICT: GADAG-582120. 4. DODDABASAPPA S/O. SHIVAPPA KOPPAD, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. YALISHIRUR, TQ: AND DISTRICT: GADAG-582120. 5. MALLAPPA S/O. FAKKIRAPPA KALAGUDI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SORATUR, TQ: AND DISTRICT: GADAG-582120. 6. SIDDAPPA S/O. CHANNAPPA GIDDAKENCHANNAVAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SORATUR, TQ: AND DISTRICT: GADAG-582120. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.21 09:48:57 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:653 CRL.P No. 102248 of 2019 AND: BASUSAB S/O. KASIMSAB KARNACHI AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SORATUR, TQ AND DISTRICT GADAG. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.V. SOMAPUR, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO, QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.663/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II-ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC II-COURT, GADAG, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 499, 500, 504 R/W SEC. 149 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners challenge the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate for the offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, and 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 2. The respondent filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), alleging that the accused made derogatory remarks against him at the Soratur bus stand. The learned Magistrate, after recording the sworn statement of the complainant, took cognizance of the offences and issued summons. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that even if the allegations in the complaint are accepted as true, they do not constitute the offence of defamation as defined under the Fifth - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:653 CRL.P No. 102248 of 2019 Exception to Section 499 of the IPC. He further argued that the complainant has not examined any eyewitnesses to substantiate his claim that his reputation was tarnished by the alleged remarks. 4. In response, learned counsel for the respondent/complainant contended that the allegations and their veracity require to be examined during trial. He argued that the petitioners are not entitled to seek relief at this stage. 5. After considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the following is noted: 6. The allegations in the complaint are that on 28.07.2016, while the complainant was standing at the Soratur bus stand, all the accused, forming an unlawful assembly with the intention of insulting the complainant, uttered that they had created fabricated documents, resulting in the complainant losing his case. Admittedly, a civil dispute was pending between the parties, in which the complainant was unsuccessful. The alleged statements were made in that context. 7. Although the incident is claimed to have occurred in a public place, no witnesses who allegedly heard the words have been examined to support the complainant’s claims. Consequently, the question of the accused harming the complainant’s reputation does not arise. Moreover, even if the allegations in the complaint are taken at face value, they fall under the Fifth Exception to Section 499 of IPC, which excludes such statements from the scope of defamation. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:653 CRL.P No. 102248 of 2019 8. In the absence of the essential elements required to constitute the alleged offences, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners/accused would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned proceedings in CC No.663/2019 on the file of the II Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC-II Court, Gadag, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41