- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1106 CRL.P No. 100782 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100782 OF 2021 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SIDDAPPA KALLAPPA KHAVATKOPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC. RTD. GOVERNMENT SERVICE, R/O. 12, 2ND MAIN NEAR KMF, DHARWAD, SHANKAR BIDARI NAGAR, DHARWAD-580009. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S.G. KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY KUDACHI POLICE STATION, DIST. BELAGAVI BY ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011. 2. IRAPPA S/O. KALLAPPA KAVATKOPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRIL., R/O. SIDDAPUR, TQ. ATHANI-591304, DISTRICT. BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. VITTHAL S.TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P. C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.129/2021 (CRIME NO.114/2020) PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. RAIBAG FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER 323, 307, 109, 354(B) 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC TO PETITIONERS CONCERN. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.25 11:20:44 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1106 CRL.P No. 100782 of 2021 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioners, accused Nos. 3 and 4, have been charge- sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 323, 307, 109, 354(B), 504, 507, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 2. The case of the prosecution is that there is a dispute between the petitioners (accused Nos. 3 and 4) and other accused persons with respondent No. 2 concerning an immovable property. On 30.09.2020, accused Nos. 1 and 2, allegedly on the instigation of accused Nos. 3 and 4, picked a quarrel with respondent No. 2. During the incident, accused No. 1 is alleged to have assaulted the complainant with a rod on his left hand, and accused No. 2 allegedly assaulted him with his legs and a stick. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that there is no direct or indirect evidence to substantiate the claim that accused Nos. 1 and 2 assaulted the complainant at the instigation of accused Nos. 3 and 4. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted solely based on the self-serving statements of the complainant. 4. In response, the learned counsel for respondent No. 2 submitted that prior to the incident, there were several quarrels between accused Nos. 3 and 4 and the complainant regarding the immovable property. Hence, it is implied that accused Nos. 3 and 4 instigated accused Nos. 1 and 2 to commit the alleged offences. The counsel argued that the allegations against accused Nos. 3 and 4 should be examined during the trial and sought dismissal of the petition. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No. 1–State reiterated the submissions made by the learned counsel for respondent No. 2. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1106 CRL.P No. 100782 of 2021 6. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been duly considered. 7. The only allegation against accused Nos. 3 and 4 is that they instigated accused Nos. 1 and 2 to assault the complainant. However, there is no direct or indirect evidence to substantiate this claim. Additionally, it is undisputed that accused Nos. 3 and 4 were not present at the scene of the incident on the date in question. Therefore, it cannot be implied that accused Nos. 1 and 2 acted on the instigation of accused Nos. 3 and 4. 8. In the absence of substantive evidence, the continuation of criminal proceedings against accused Nos. 3 and 4, based solely on the self-serving statement of the complainant, would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in CC No.129/201 pending on the file of the learned Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag insofar as it relates to the petitioners – accused Nos.3 and 4 is hereby quashed. iii) The Trial Court is hereby directed to proceed against the accused Nos.1 and 2 in accordance with law without there being any observation made in this order, and the observation made in this order is only for the purpose of the present petition. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE BKM Ct:vh/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 67