- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38087 CRL.P No. 13017 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13017 OF 2025 BETWEEN: ADITYA AVINASH KARMARKAR AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, S/O. AVINASH VISHNUPANT KARMARKAR, R/AT NEAR LAST BUS STOP, PLOT NO.130, PANNASE LAYOUT BHAMTI, RANAPRATAP NAGAR S.O, NAGPUR, MAHARASHTRA - 440 022. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ROHIT RAJKUMAR KUKREJA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MICO LAYOUT POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. SMT. SHIVANI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, D/O SANJAY PAULKAR, R/AT FLAT NO.158, SAMAJA BHUSHAN, ADARSH COLONY, NAGPUR CITY, MAHARASHTRA - 440 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38087 CRL.P No. 13017 of 2025 THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME NO.0094/2025 (PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE- A) REGISTERED BY MICO LAYOUT TRAFFIC POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 281, 125(a), 106 OF BNS 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS (TRAFFIC COURT-IV), BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in Crime No.94/2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 281, 125(a), 106 of BNS 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, has sought to persuade this Court to quash the proceedings on the premise that on the unfortunate day of the incident, the deceased himself was riding the motorcycle, while the petitioner, who is the registered owner of the vehicle, was only proceeding as a - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38087 CRL.P No. 13017 of 2025 pillion rider. It is contended that the petitioner has been wrongly implicated. 3. On perusal of the material placed before this Court, it is evident that a criminal case has been registered against the petitioner, which prima facie proceeds on the assumption that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding by the petitioner. The matter is still under investigation and the Investigating Officer has not yet filed the final report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. The question as to who was actually riding the vehicle at the relevant point of time, and whether the petitioner can be held culpable for rash and negligent riding or whether deceased was riding the bike and petitioner entrusted his new bike to the deceased needs investigation. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, has sought to persuade this Court to quash the proceedings on the premise that on the unfortunate day of the incident, the deceased himself was - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38087 CRL.P No. 13017 of 2025 riding the motorcycle, while the petitioner, who is the registered owner of the vehicle, was only proceeding as a pillion rider. It is contended that the petitioner has been wrongly implicated. 5. It is a settled principle that the High Court, while exercising inherent powers, cannot embark upon a roving enquiry or conduct a mini-trial to test the correctness of the allegations when investigation is still in progress. Interference at this premature stage would amount to stifling a legitimate investigation and foreclosing the statutory right of the Investigating Officer to unearth the truth based on evidence. The proper course would be to permit the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation and submit the final report, upon which the petitioner would have an opportunity to raise all permissible legal and factual contentions. 6. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that no grounds are made out for quashing the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38087 CRL.P No. 13017 of 2025 proceedings at this stage. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to work out his remedy, if so advised, after the final report is submitted before the jurisdictional Court. 7. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed with the above liberty. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE YN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT: BHK