- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31794 CRL.P No. 6931 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6931 OF 2025 BETWEEN: 1. YOGANNA. H. C. S/O. LATE. CHIKKARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, H.N. PURA TOWN, HASSAN - 573 201. 2. NATARAJ.H.C S/O. LATE. CHIKKARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDING AT MIG NO. 3611, 2ND CROSS, 19TH MAIN, VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE, MYSURU CITY - 570 001. 3. SHWETHA W/O. YOGANNA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, AMBEDKAR NAGAR, H.N. PURA TOWN, HASSAN - 573 201. 4. SAROJAMMA W/O. SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT MULLURE VILLAGE, GAVADAGERE HOBLI, Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31794 CRL.P No. 6931 of 2025 HUNASURE TALUK, HASSAN - 573 201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ABHIJITH M M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HOLENARASIPURA TOWN PS, HOLENARASIPURA CIRCLE, HASSAN. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. PARVATAMMA W/O. LATE. PUTTARAJU AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT AMBEDKAR NAGAR, HOLENARASIPURA TOWN, HASSAN - 573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADDL. SPP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/SEC.482 OF CR.P.C (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO. 804/2024 (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 83/2024) OF HOLENARASIPURA TOWN POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 504, 323, 324, 326 READ WITH 34 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HOLENARASIPURA. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31794 CRL.P No. 6931 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER Respondent No.2 – the defacto complainant, has lodged a complaint alleging that the present petitioners, despite being parties to a pending partition suit, have physically assaulted her and her two children. On the basis of this complaint, a criminal case has been registered. The materials on record indicate that the Investigating Officer, after conducting investigation, has filed a charge sheet on 31.03.2024. It is specifically alleged by respondent No.2 that while she was at her residence, the petitioners forcibly entered, picked up a quarrel, and in the course of the scuffle physically assaulted her and her children. The allegations further disclose that her children sustained injuries in the said incident. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31794 CRL.P No. 6931 of 2025 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has sought to persuade this Court to quash the proceedings by contending that respondent No.2 has laid a false and frivolous complaint solely with an intention to pressurize the petitioners in the pending civil litigation relating to partition of family properties. It is argued that the criminal proceedings are nothing but an abuse of process of law. 3. However, this Court, on a careful perusal of the charge sheet papers, is unable to accept the said contention. The Investigating Officer has not only recorded the statement of witnesses but has also placed on record medical documents, namely the Wound Certificates of respondent No.2 and her two children. A perusal of the medical records clearly discloses that the children of respondent No.2 have sustained injuries, one of which is a fracture of the left little finger, which has been categorised as grievous in nature. The existence of such medical evidence, in the considered opinion of this Court, prima - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31794 CRL.P No. 6931 of 2025 facie supports the prosecution case and renders the matter triable. 4. The argument of the petitioners that the pendency of a partition suit converts the present criminal proceedings into a civil dispute is misconceived. The pendency of a civil dispute does not in itself preclude initiation or continuation of criminal proceedings, if the allegations prima-facie disclose commission of cognizable offences. Once the Investigating Officer, after due investigation, has filed a charge sheet placing reliance on medical evidence and other materials, it is for the prosecution, during trial, to prove its case and for the petitioners to defend themselves. At this stage, this Court cannot embark upon a meticulous examination of the merits of the prosecution case or weigh the evidence in detail. 5. In the considered view of this Court, when specific allegations of assault are supported by medical - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31794 CRL.P No. 6931 of 2025 evidence indicating injuries, including a grievous injury, it would not be appropriate to quash the proceedings merely on the ground that a partition suit is pending between the parties. The allegations require adjudication in a full- fledged trial. 6. Without expressing any opinion on the ultimate merits of the case, this Court is satisfied that the present petition does not merit interference under its inherent jurisdiction. The petitioners are required to face trial and contest the matter in accordance with law. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. In view of dismissal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2025 does not survive for consideration and the same is dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22