- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200436 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. RUDRA GOUDA S/O SANGANAGOUDA POLICE PATIL AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT VANDAHALLI, HOSUR VILLAGE LINGASUGUR TALUK RAICHUR DIST – 577 221 2. SMT.ANITAMMA W/O SANGANAGOUDA POLICE PATIL AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT VANDAHALLI HOSUR VILLAGE LINGASUGUR TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT – 577 221 … PETITIONERS (BY SRI.AVINASH M. ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HUTTI POLICE STATION LINGASUGUR SUB-DIVISION BY STATE ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 HIGH COURT, KALABURAGI DIST. AND TALUK – 585 103 2. SHIVAPPA S/O PAKEERAPPA CHALUVADI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT VANDAHALLI HOSUR VILLAGE LINGASUGUR TALUK RAICHUR DISTRICT – 577 221 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.GOPAL KRISHNA YADAV, HCGP FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED COGNIZANCE ORDER DATED 14.08.2023 AND ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.NO.5175/2024 ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.0091/2023 HUTTI POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 323, 324, 504, 506 READ WITH 34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE ALONG WITH UNDER SECTION 3(1)(r)(s) 3(2) (VA) OF THE SC AND ST AMENDMENT ACT 2015 PRESENTLY PENDING ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, RAICHUR SIT AT SINDHANUR 3RD ADJ LINGASUGUR INENARY COURT, AT LINGASAGUR. THIS PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 02.04.2025 AT KALABURAGI BENCH, COMING ON FOR ‘PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT’, BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 CAV ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. This petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the order of taking cognizance dated 14.08.2023 and the entire proceedings in Spl.Case No.5172/2024 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Court, Raichur, sit at Sindhanur III ADJ Lingasugur, Itenary Court at Lingasugur arising out of crime No.91/2023 for the offences punishable under sections 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. Factual matrix of the case: 2. It is the case of prosecution that, the complainant and others are the residents of Vandahalli, Hosur Village. Accused Nos.1 and 2 belong to Lingayat community of the same village. The complainant and accused belong to the same village and were known to each other. The complainant had received an amount of Rs.32,00,000/- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 to install a window fan in his land. In the said amount, he transferred the amount of Rs.12,00,000/- for the purpose of purchasing the property to the account of Sangana Gowda. In the meantime, the said Sangana Gowda died due to corona. The complainant insisted accused Nos.1 and 2 to repay the amount which was deposited to the account of the deceased Sangana Gowda. The accused No.1 being a son and accused No.2 being the wife of deceased Sangana Gowda respectively were dodging the matter on one or the other pretext. On 14.05.2023, around 10.00 a.m., when accused Nos.1 and 2 were going in front of the house of the complainant, the complainant and others insisted accused Nos.1 and 2 to repay the amount. At that point of time, accused Nos.1 and 2 stated to have scolded by naming the caste of the complainant and others and the accused No.1 took a wooden stick and assaulted on the right leg of the complainant and caused injuries. Accused No.2 took a stone and threw the same on the complainant. However, the complainant escaped. Even CWs.2 to 4 have been scolded when they tried to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 interfere and pacify the said matter. Therefore, a complaint came to be registered. The respondent police have conducted investigation and submitted the charge sheet. 3. Heard Sri.Avinash M.Angadi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Gopal Krishna Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1. 4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the complainant had lodged this complaint by misusing the case only in order to coerce the petitioner to settle the matter with the complainant. 5. It is further submitted that the complainant instead of taking proper steps to recover the amount alleged to have been paid to the father of the accused No.1, the complainant approached accused No.1, took the law into his own hands and started assaulting accused Nos.1 and 2 when they were going to the land in front of complainant’s house. The complainant also filed a false case against the petitioners not only for the purpose of harassing, but also pressurizing them to repay the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 amount. Therefore, the petition has to be allowed and proceedings against the petitioners has to be quashed. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 - State vehemently justified the filing of the charge sheet and also stated that prima facie, there are materials to show that the petitioners have quarreled and insulted by naming the caste of the complainant and others and also there are injuries caused to the complainant with wooden stick. 7. It is further submitted that there are eyewitnesses to the incident, corroborated by the wound certificate issued by the Doctor who examined the complainant. Therefore, it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings. Making such submissions, the learned High Court Government Pleader prays to dismiss the petition. 8. Having considered the said submissions and also perused the averments of the charge sheet, it appears from the record that the alleged incident had taken place on 14.05.2023 around 10.00 a.m. However, a complaint came to be registered on 23.05.2023. The reason assigned in lodging the complaint is that, after having - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 due deliberations with the family members, a complaint came to be registered against the petitioners. Moreover, the certificate would have been procured on 24.06.2023. Even though the complainant and others stated to have received the injuries on 14.05.2023, lodging the complaint belatedly and registration of FIR on such complaint, certainly, would give serious doubt regarding the genuineness of the incident. 9. In this context, it is relevant to refer the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.V.RAM KUMAR v. STATE OF TELANGANA AND ANOTHER1, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held in paragraph No.15 as under: “15. The position of law is well settled by a catena of judgments of this Court that in order to entertain a challenge to the FIR, charge- sheet or an order taking cognizance, all that has to be seen is, whether from a bare reading of the charge-sheet, the ingredients of the sections charged therein are being prima facie made out or not. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment of this Court in State 1 (2025) 3 SCC 475 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] , wherein it was held that : (SCC pp. 378-79, para 102) “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” (emphasis supplied) 10. Having considered the ratio of the dictum rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the said ratio is squarely applicable to the case on hand. Moreover, it appears from the record that the complainant has misused the community for the purpose of pressurizing the petitioners - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5101 CRL.P No. 200436 of 2024 not only to repay the amount, but also, for the settlement of the entire issue. Therefore, it is a fit case to exercise the inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings. 11. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. ii) The order of taking cognizance dated 14.08.2023 and the entire proceedings in Spl.Case No.5172/2024 on the file of III Additional District and Sessions Court, Raichur, sit at Sindhanur III ADJ Lingasugur, Itenary Court at Lingasugur arising out of crime No.91/2023 of respondent police, are hereby quashed. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE UN/List No.: 19 Sl No.: 3