- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:265 CRL.P No. 103605 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103605 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: CHETAN S/O. SHARNABSAPPA KUNDAGOL AGE. 41 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE, R/O KUNDAGOL, WAKAR, BANASHANKARI ROAD, BADAMI, BAGALKOT-587201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BADAMI POLICE STATION, BAGALKOT, REPRESENTED BY ITS, STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD. 2. SHIVALILA W/O. BASAVAPRABHU KUNDAGOL AGE. 35 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. SHIROL, NARAGUND, DIST. GADAG-582207. 3. UMESH S/O. GANGADHARAPPA MAREGUDDI @ MARE AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE, R/O. SHIROL, NARAGUND, DIST. GADAG-582207. 4. VEERANNA S/O. GANGADHARAPPA MAREGUDDI @ MARE, AGE. 41 YEARS, OCC. PDO, R/O SHIROL, NARAGUND, DIST. GADAG-582207. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.01.10 12:40:21 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:265 CRL.P No. 103605 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.10.2024 IN CC NO.71/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BADAMI, THEREBY REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE UNDER SECTION 319 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 323, 324, 355 AND 504 OF IPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER Learned Addl. Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent/State. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were dropped from the charge sheet. In the evidence, the de facto complainant stated that accused No. 1 assaulted the de facto complainant at the instigation of accused Nos. 2 and 3. The trial Court, after considering the evidence, held that there is no substantive material to establish the said allegation against accused Nos. 2 and 3, except the self-serving statement of the de facto complainant. The trial Court has rightly passed the impugned order. I find no error or illegality in the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE JTR CT:VH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9