- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48221 CRL.P No. 8734 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8734 OF 2023 (482 (Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAMESH KUMAR KOTHARI S/O LATE JEETHMAL, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O KOTHARI BUILDERS, CHIKKABASTHI ROAD, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. 2. SRI. MANJUNATHA M D S/O LATE DEVAPPA M D AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O 2nd MAIN ROAD, HEMAVATHI NAGARA HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SUYOG HERELE E., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HASSAN EXTENSION, POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48221 CRL.P No. 8734 of 2023 HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. SRI. DINESH KUMAR B N S/O NARAYANA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NEAR NARASIMHASWAMY TEMPLE, GOWRIKOPPALU MAIN ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1, SMT.A.R.SHARADAMBA, ADV., FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED IV ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., AT HASSAN C.C.NO.1225/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 468, 464, 467, 471, 420 READ WITH 34 OF IPC., ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48221 CRL.P No. 8734 of 2023 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. On the following allegations, a police report has been filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 464, 467, 471, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. "17. ೇನ ಸಂಪ ಾ ಾಂಶ PÀ®A 464 467 468 471 420 gÉ:« 34 L¦¹ ಾಸನ ಬಾವೆ ೕ ಾೆಯ ಸರಹೆ ೇದ ಾಸನ !ಾ"ನಗರ 3$ೇ ಅಡ'ರೆ ಯ(ರುವ ಾಸನದ(ರುವ *+ಾ-ಕನ-°ÖA. / ಇಂ*1ಯಗ2ಳ ಮತು 6ಾಸು 78ಗಳ ಸಂಘ()£ÀÄß ಸಹಾರ ಸಂಘಗಳ ಉಪ1ಬಂಧಕರು ಾಗೂ ಸಂಘಗಳ *+ಾ( $ೊಂ!ಾಾ=ಾಗಳ ಕ>ೇ ಾಸನರವಂದ $ೊಂ!ಾ? @ಾAೊಂಡು 2006$ೇ ಾನ( ನಗ ಾBವೃD EಾF=ಾರಂದ 16ೇಶನವನುG 30 ವಷ2ಗಳವ ೆೆ ಗುI ೆ ಒಪ8ಂದ ಪತFದ ಮೂಲಕ ಪೆದು ಕಟMಡವ£ÀÄß ಕNM, ಸಂಘದ (Oೈ+ಾ) 1ಬಂಧ$ೆಗಳ ಅನುಾರ ಸಂಘದ( «/ ಇಂ*1ಯQ ಮತು A(Rೕ ಪದ , 6ಾಸು 78 ಪದ ಪೆದ ಪದ«ÃಧರರನುG ಸದಸ"ರ$ಾGS @ಾAೊಂಡು, ಸಂಘದ ಚು$ಾವೆ ನೆ, ಒಟುM 13 ಜನ ಚು$ಾVತ ಸದಸ"ರ°è, ಅಧ"Wರು, ಾಯ2ದ72ಗಳX, ಖZಾಂ[ಗಳನುG ಆ]^@ಾA, ಉ_ದ 9 ಜನ 1!ೇ2ಶಕದು, ಸಂಘದ ಎ+ಾ( ನಡವ_ೆಗಳನುG $ೋAೊಳXaವ ಜ6ಾOಾ ಇವರ!ಾSರುbೆ . ಸದ ಸಂಘದ 2019-2020$ೇ ಾನ°è ಾ-1 ಮತು ಾ-2 ರವರು ಸಂಘದ ಚು$ಾVತ 1!ೇ2ಶಕ ಾSದು, ಅಂಕಣ 12 ಕಂಡ ಎ1 ಆ ೋeಯು ಅಧ"W ಾSಯೂ ಮತು ಎ2 ಆ ೋeಯು ಾಯ2ದ72fಾSಯೂ ಆ]^fಾSದು, ಸದ ಾನ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48221 CRL.P No. 8734 of 2023 ಅಂತ"ದ°è 6ಾg2ಕ ಆಯ-ವ"ಯಗಳನುG ಾ-1 ಮತು ಾ-2ರವರು ಪ7ೕ ವ"bಾ"ಸ ದ ಬUÉÎ ಆhೇಪ ವ"ಕ ಪA, Oೈ+ಾದ ಪFಾರ 2020- 2021 $ೇ ಾನ ಚು$ಾವೆ ನೆದ ನಂತರ ಸಂಘದ ನ ೕಕರಣೆ^ ಅ*2 ಸ(ಸುವಂbೆ I_ದರೂ ಸಾ, ಎ1, ಎ2 ಆ ೋeಗಳX ೇ ಸಂಘದ +ಾjಾಂಶವನುG ಪೆಯುವ ದುರು!ೇಶಂದ ಾ-1 ಮತು ಾ-2ರವರ ಸlಯನುG ಸೃgM, ಸಂಘದ ನ ೕಕರಣPÉÌ ಅ*2 ಸ( Rೕಸ @ಾAರುವmದು, ಾ!ಾರರ ೇ_ೆVಂದ, !ಾಖ+ಾIಗ¼À ಪ7ೕಲ$ೆVಂದ, ಎoಎಎ/ ತpರ ವರ ಮತು ತ1qೆVಂದ ದೃಢಪNMರುvÉÛ. ಆದಂದ sೕಲ^ಂಡ ಆ ೋeಗಳ ರುದD sೕಲ^ಂಡ ಕಲಂ jÃvÁå !ೋtಾ ೋ¥ÀuÁ ಪತF." 2. During the course of the trial, FSL report has been obtained by the trial Court in respect of certain signatures. On the strength of the opinion rendered therein, the case of the petitioners is that the proceedings against them has to be quashed. 3. It is well established principle of law that, the Court can take the help of experts in analysing technical aspects. 4. Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as under:- "45. Opinions of experts.- When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48221 CRL.P No. 8734 of 2023 persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts. Such persons are called experts." 5. It is also well established in law that the opinion of experts rendered under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, is not binding on the Court. The Court is always at liberty to differ from the same by giving proper reasons. Under the said circumstances, the question of quashing the proceedings solely based upon the FSL report does not arise. Whether the petitioners are guilty of the offences alleged or not has to be established by the prosecution during the trial. 6. It is not contented by the petitioners that the facts alleged do not constitute an offence against the petitioners. 7. For the aforementioned reasons, the petition stands dismissed. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33