- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:778 WP No. 104935 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 104935 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: KUM. M. VAISHALI D/O. G. MALLESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, WORKING AS SUB REGISTRAR, JAGALUR, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577528. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SATISH K, SRI. SURESH S.BHAT AND SRI. ADITYA R.CHAKRAGIRI, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTUR POLICE STATION, VIJAYANAGAR DISTRICT-583134. 2. SMT. INDRAMMA W/O. LATE K.M.SHEKHARAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O. NELKUDARE VILLAGE, TQ. H.B.HALLI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA -583212. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y.DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ANWAR BASHA B., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF Cr.P.C., 1973, PRAYING TO, CALL FOR RECORDS FROM RESPONDENT NO.1 IN RESPECT OF IMPUGNED COMPLAINT DATED 13/09/2022 (ANNEXURE-C) AND THE IMPUGNED FIRST INFORMATION REPORT DATED 13/09/2022 IN CRIME NO.178/2022 (ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.21 09:49:01 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:778 WP No. 104935 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner/accused No.3, who is sought to be prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 506, 504, 419, 420, 465, 468, 471, and 323 read with Section 149 of IPC, is before this Court. 2. Accused No.1, by impersonating the deceased husband of the defacto complainant, affixing a duplicate photo and fake Aadhar card, connived with accused Nos.2 and 3 to execute the registered sale deed in favor of accused No.2, in respect of the property belonging to the deceased husband of the defacto complainant. The allegation against accused No.3 (Sub-Registrar) is that, while executing the registered sale deed, he did not verify the genuineness of the documents, photo, and Aadhaar card produced. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner/accused No.3 is not under an obligation to verify the genuineness of the documents presented to him. He is only required to ensure that the documents presented by the parties are in order. Furthermore, the petitioner is not required to verify the identity of the person presenting the document for registration. The allegations made in the FIR do not disclose the commission of the offence alleged against him. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:778 WP No. 104935 of 2022 4. In response, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/State submitted that the allegations made in the FIR disclose the commission of the offences alleged against the petitioner, and the veracity of the allegations can only be examined at the time of trial, not at this stage. Hence, the learned counsel sought dismissal of the petition. 5. The arguments of the learned counsel for the parties have been duly considered. 6. Rule 73 of the Karnataka Registration Rules, 1965 specifies that the duty of the registering officer is not to enquire into the validity of a document presented for registration or to address any written or verbal protest against the registration of a document. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Sulochanamma Vs. H. Nanjundaswamy and Others has held that the Sub-Registrar is entrusted with the duty of registering documents in accordance with the provisions of the Act and is not authorized to investigate the genuineness of the documents. Even otherwise, at the most, it may amount to dereliction of duty, which does not constitute an offence punishable as alleged against the petitioner. Therefore, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:778 WP No. 104935 of 2022 Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The registration of FIR in Crime No.178/2022 registered by Kottur Police Station, Vijayanagar District insofar it relates to the petitioner/accused No.3 is hereby quashed. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off as not surviving for consideration. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56