- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31291 CRL.P No. 7116 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7116 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. DEVARAJU @ KURUBHA S/O. LATE VIJAYANNA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT. K. MELANAHALLI VILLAGE DABBEGHATTA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 224 2. MADHUSUDHAN M.D. @ MADHU @ KURUBHA S/O DEVARAJU AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT. K. MELANAHALLI VILLAGE DABBEGHATTA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 224 3. SHANKARE GOWDA M.D. @ CHETHAN S/O DEVARAJU @ KURUBHA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT. K. MELANAHALLI VILLAGE DABBEGHATTA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 224 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI: UMESHA G., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31291 CRL.P No. 7116 of 2024 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY TURUVEKERE POLICE STATION TUMKUR - 572 227 REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT COMPLEX BENGALURU - 560 001 2. HARISH S/O LATE RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT K MELANAHALLI VILLAGE DABBEGHATTA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 224 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TUMKURU IN SPL.C.NO.51/2024 (CR.NO.295/2023) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 324, 504, 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF IPC AND UNDER SECTIONS 3(1)(C), 3(1)(S), 3(1)(R), 3(1)(2)(VA) OF SC/ST (POA) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 AND GRANT ANY SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31291 CRL.P No. 7116 of 2024 ORAL ORDER This captioned petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in Spl.C.No.51 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3(1)(c), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. 2. Heard the petitioners' counsel and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and perused the records. 3. The prosecution version, in brief, is that on 18.12.2023, at about 7:30 to 8:00 a.m., CWs.1 and 3 were proceeding towards their house through a public mud road from K. Melanahalli, which passes adjacent to the residence of accused No.1. It is alleged that, at that juncture, accused No.3 verbally abused CW4, and this altercation was connected to a dispute regarding the sale of Ragi grass. In the course of the said scuffle, it is further alleged that accused No.2 was holding an iron machete in his right hand. During the incident, accused - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31291 CRL.P No. 7116 of 2024 No.1 is said to have assaulted CW1 on the left side of his neck and face, accused No.2 is alleged to have struck CW1 on his left hand with the iron machete, and accused No.3 is stated to have assaulted CW1 with his hands on his lips and left ear, and also made an attempt to strangulate CW1 by gripping his neck. 4. The prosecution case, in substance, is that CW1 is alleged to have sustained simple injuries in the course of the incident, and on that basis, a crime came to be registered alleging that accused Nos.1 to 3 had abused the complainant by calling him by his caste name, and had also criminally intimidated him. 5. A careful perusal of the complaint and the specific overt acts attributed to each of the accused, as reflected in the charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer after completion of investigation, makes it evident that the matter involves clash of two groups which cannot be adjudicated at this stage. The allegations, as narrated, prima facie disclose the commission of cognizable offences and, therefore, this Court finds no reason to exercise its inherent powers to quash the proceedings at this juncture. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31291 CRL.P No. 7116 of 2024 6. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has invited the attention of this Court to the fact that the second respondent–complainant is also alleged to have physically assaulted the mother of accused No.1, pursuant to which a counter case has been registered in Crime No.303 of 2023. The very lodging of a complaint by the first petitioner, through his mother, acknowledging the same incident, makes it clear that this is a case and counter-case situation arising out of the same incident which allegedly occurred on 18.12.2023 between 07:30 a.m. and 08:00 a.m. 7. It is a settled principle of law that in situations where a case and counter-case have been registered in respect of the same occurrence, the rival versions must be tested and adjudicated in a full-fledged trial, where the prosecution in each case bears the burden of proving its version beyond reasonable doubt. The Trial Court is also required to assess the evidence in both matters simultaneously to arrive at a finding as to who the aggressor was and what injuries were sustained by each side. In such circumstances, exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31291 CRL.P No. 7116 of 2024 proceedings in one of the cases would amount to pre-judging the facts and interfering in the domain of the Trial Court. 8. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, this Court holds that this is not a fit case for exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The criminal petition stands dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE *bgn/- CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1