- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3137 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. HEMACHANDRA, S/O VASUDEVA K, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE, JODUMARGA POST, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574219. ALSO AT: NO.15-311-2, THALAPADY HOUSE, BANTWAL MOODA VILLAGE, BANTWAL, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT-574219. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NATARAJ G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE BY BANTWAL RURAL POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU – 560001. 2. MALATI, W/O D. KRISHNA NAIK, C/O VENKATARAMANA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, KONDANGI HOUSE, Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 IRU GRAMA AND POST, BANTWAL TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R.PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR (CRIME) NO.0119/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-B BY THE BANTWAL RURAL POLICE STATION, D.K, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 417, 406, 420, 465, 468, 471 R/W 34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, BANTWAL, D.K. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER This petition is filed by a practicing advocate, who is arraigned as accused No.4, seeking quashing of the proceedings in FIR (Crime) No.119/2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC. 2. The respondent No.2/defacto complainant has instituted a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, alleging that accused No.1, in collusion with the present petitioner/accused No.4, has - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 fabricated a General Power of Attorney with an ulterior motive of usurping the complainant’s property. It is further alleged that, pursuant to the said creation of the GPA, accused No.1, again with the support and active involvement of the petitioner/accused No.4, has executed a Release Deed in his favour. On the strength of these allegations, the complainant has arraigned the petitioner, who is an advocate by profession, as accused No.4 in the proceedings. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings on the specific ground that, even if the allegations contained in the private complaint are taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, no ingredients constituting any cognizable offence are made out against the petitioner, and therefore continuation of the proceedings would be an abuse of process of law. 3. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel representing the defacto complainant/respondent No.2, and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 4. Upon a careful perusal of the material available on record, this Court has noticed that respondent - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 No.2/complainant has already approached the jurisdictional Civil Court by filing a comprehensive suit in O.S.No.65/2021 wherein the very same transactions are the subject matter of adjudication. Before embarking upon further consideration in the present proceedings, this Court finds it appropriate to take note of the reliefs prayed for by the complainant in the said civil suit. In order to appreciate the scope of the dispute and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, it is necessary to extract the specific prayers sought in the said suit, which read as follows: “A. For a declaration that the plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the plaint ‘A’ schedule properties by virtue of last Will and testament executed by their father Krishna Nayak as per the Will dated 07.09.1989 registered as document No.34/89-90 registered in the office of SRO Bantwal, as such the plaintiffs are entitled to enter their joint names in the revenue records pertaining to the plaint ‘A’ schedule properties. B. To cancel the alleged partition deed dated 20.01.2016 as per document No.4955/2015-16 in the office of SRO Bantwal entered into in respect of the ‘A’ schedule property. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 C. For a declaration that the alleged GPA dated 24.03.2021 (Notarial registered No.3683/20- 21) alleged to have been executed by the plaintiffs is invalid executed by the plaintiffs and cancel the same. D. To cancel the release deed dated 29.03.2021 bearing document No.5636/20-21 in the office of SRO Bantwal executed in respect of the plaint ‘A’ schedule property. E. For a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents, etc. from in any way interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property by the plaintiffs either on the strength of the alleged partition deed document No.4955/15- 16 and release deed document No.5636/20-21 or in any other manner whatsoever in the interest of justice.” F. And such other and further relief as the Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case.” 5. On a careful consideration of the afore-extracted prayers, it becomes manifest that respondent No.2 has already instituted a comprehensive civil suit wherein the validity and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 legality of the very same General Power of Attorney and the Release Deed have been put in issue. In the said suit, respondent No.2 has sought a declaration that the alleged documents are null and void and has further prayed for a declaration that she, along with her siblings, are the absolute owners of the schedule property. The institution of the said suit, which is pending adjudication before the jurisdictional Civil Court, clearly demonstrates that the dispute essentially revolves around questions of title and ownership. It is relevant to note that the said suit has been filed as early as on 02.12.2021 and is presently pending consideration. 6. Despite having invoked the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, respondent No.2 has subsequently chosen to set the criminal law in motion by filing the present private complaint. In the said complaint, it is alleged that the petitioner herein, who has been arraigned as accused No.4, along with other accused persons, has committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and other allied provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The gist of the complaint is that the accused persons, acting in collusion, have created a forged General - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 Power of Attorney and, on the strength of the same, executed a Release Deed with the object of unlawfully usurping the complainant’s property. Since the very foundation of the criminal proceedings rests on the same transactions that are already sub judice in the civil suit, this Court deems it necessary to reproduce paragraph Nos.3, 4 and 5 of the private complaint, which encapsulate the allegations made against the petitioner and other accused persons. 3. ತದನಂತರ ಇಾ ಾ ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ.226/4-0.21 ಎೆ , ಸ.ನಂ.234/2ಎ21-0.37 ಎೆ , ಸ.ನಂ.234/2ಎ21-31 ಎೆ ಮತು ಸ.ನಂ.360/2ಎ-0.70 ಎೆ ಜೕನುಗಳನು 1ೇ ಆೋಯು ಕಬ ಸುವ ದುರು"ೆ#ೕಶ%ಂದ, ಆೋ ನಂಬ 4ೇ ಯವರ &ೆ ೕರ'ೆ(ಂದ ಇಬ)ರೂ *ಾ+,ಾ+ ಸ-ಾನ ಉ"ೆ#ೕಶ%ಂದ ನನ ಮತು /ಾ0"ಾರರ ಸ1ಯನು ನಕ2 -ಾ3, ದುರು"ೆ#ೕಶ%ಂದ ಾನು ಮತು /ಾ0"ಾರೆಂದು ಗುರು45, 6.5 ೋ3ನ ೋಟ8 ವ9ೕಲಾದ ; ೕ ಐ ಅಬು#> ರ1-ಾ? ಇವರ ಸಮ@ಮ ೋಟ8ಯ> 8.ನಂ.3683/2021 ರಂAೆ ಅBಾರ ಪತ ಎಂಬ ನಕ2 "ಾಖEೆಯನು ಸೃGH5 %ಾಂಕ.24/03/2021 ರಂದು ತ,ಾ85ರುAಾೆ ಮತು ಸ% "ಾಖEೆಯನು -ಾನI ಾIಯಲಯೆJ Kಾಜರು ಪ35ರುAೇೆ. ಸ% ನಕ2 "ಾಖEೆಯ2Lರುವ ಸ1 ನಮM"ಾ+ರುವN%ಲL. ಬದEಾ+ ಆೋ ನಂಬ 1 ಮತು 4 /ೇ8 ನಕ2,ಾ+ ಸೃGH5ರುAಾೆ. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 4. ಸ% OೕEಾJP5ದಂAೆ ತ,ಾ85ದ ನಕ2 ಅBಾರ ಪತ ದ ಆQಾರದ2L 1ೇ ಆೋ, 4 8ಂದ 6ೇ ಆೋಗಳ &ೆ ೕರ'ೆಯಂAೆ ಪರಸRರ SಾೕEಾ+ ಸ-ಾನ ಉ"ೆ#ೕಶ%ಂದ ನನ ಮತು /ಾ0"ಾರಾದ 1 ಮತು 2ೇ ಯವರ 5Tಾ5ಗಳನು ಕಬ ಸುವ ಉ"ೆ#ೕಶ%ಂದ %ಾಂಕ.29,30/03/2021 ರಂದು ಬಂUಾVಳ ಉಪೋಂ"ಾವ'ಾBಾ8ಗಳ ಕWೇ8ಯ2L ೋಂದP,ಾದ 1ೇ ಪNಸಕದ ದ/ಾXೇಜು ನಂಬ , 6ಎ?n-1-05636/2020-21 ರಂAೆ ಒಂದು Zೕಜ[8 82ೕ\ 3ೕ]ನು ೋಂ"ಾ(5ರುAಾೆ. ಎEಾL ಆೋಗ ಗೂ OೕEಾJP5ದ ಸ% /ಾ-ಾನI ಅBಾರ ಪತ ವN ನಕ2 "ಾಖEೆ ಎಂದು ೊ4ದ#ರೂ, ಉ"ೆ#ೕಶ ಪ^ವ[ಕXಾ+ _,ಾ[% ಮತು /ಾ0"ಾರಾದ 1 ಮತು 2ೇಯವ8 ೆ `ೕಸ, ವಂಚೆ ಮತು bSಾVಸ "ೊ ೕಹ -ಾ3 ಆ5ಯ ಹಕJನು ಕ5%ರುAಾೆ. OೕEೆ Kೇ ದಂAೆ ೋಂ"ಾ(ತ ದ/ಾXೇdನ ಆQಾರದ2L ಸ% ಜೕನುಗಳ ಪಹP ಬದEಾವ'ೆ eಾಬು ಇಾ ಾ ಮದ ಾ ಮ ಕರPೕಕರ ಕWೇ8 ೆ ಕಡತ ಬಂ%ರುXಾಗ ನನ ಮತು /ಾ0 1 ಮತು 2 ರವರ ಗಮನೆJ ಸ% bWಾರ ಬಂದ ಕೂಡEೇ ಆ eಾಬು %ಾಂಕ.21/05/2021 ರಂದು 2gತ ಆhೇಪವನು ಸ2L5ದು#, ತದನಂತರ ಸ% 2gತ ಆhೇಪದ ಆQಾರದ2L ತಹ;ೕEಾ#ರರು ಕWೇ8 ಬಂUಾVಳ ಇ2L ಆi.ಆi.j/3.5.ಆi.035/2021 ರಂAೆ ಪ ಕರಣ "ಾಖEಾ+, ಸ% ಪ ಕರಣದ2L ತಹ;ೕEಾ#ರರು ಬಂUಾVಳ ಇವರು 1ೇ ಆೋ ಇವರ Kೆಸ8 ೆ ಪಹP ಬದEಾವ'ೆ ಆಗದಂAೆ ಆ"ೇಶ lೕ3ರುAಾೆ. ಸ% ಆhೇಪದ ನಕಲು ಮತು ಆ"ೇಶದ ನಕಲನು Kಾಜರು ಪ35ರುAೇೆ. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 5. 4ೇ ಆೋಯು ನು8ತ ಾIಯXಾ%,ಾ+ದು#, ಉ"ೆ#ೕಶ ಪ^ವ[ಕXಾ+ ಅಕ ಮ Eಾಭ ಗ ಸಲು ದುರು"ೆ#ೕಶ%ಂದ 1ೇ ಆೋnಂ% ೆ SಾೕEಾ+ ನನ Kಾಗೂ 1 ಮತು 2ೇ /ಾ0"ಾರರ ಸ1ಗಳನು ನಕ2,ಾ+ ಸೃGH5, ೋಟ8ಯವರ ಮುಂ"ೆ Kೇಮಚಂದ , 6.ಎ\.5, ಎ>.ಎ>.6 ಎಂದು ಗುರು45ರುAಾೆ. ಅಲL"ೇ ಸ% ನಕ2 "ಾಖEೆಯ ಆQಾರದ Oೕೆ ೆ ಅವಸರ ಅವಸರXಾ+ 5 %ವಸಗಳ ಅಂತರದ2L 1ೇ ಆೋಯ ಮುoಾಂತರ ೋಂ"ಾ(ತ ನಕ2 82ೕ\ 3ೕ]("ಾಖEೆ ನಂಬ 5636/2020- 21) ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ ಇಾ ಾ ಮದ ಸ.ನಂ.226/4 (Full)-0.21 ಎೆ ಸ.ನಂ.234/2ಎ21 (Full)-0.37 ಎೆ ಸ.ನಂ.234/2ಎ21(Full)-1.31 ಎೆ ಮತು ಸ.ನಂ.360/2ಎ(Full)-0.70 ಎೆ ಜೕನುಗಳ eಾಬು "ಾಖEೆಯನು ತ,ಾ85, ದ/ಾXೇd ೆ ಸ1 Kಾ9 ಅದರ2L ಾP5ದ ಆ5ಗಳ ಪಾeಾೆ ನpೆಸುವ2L 1ೇ ಆೋnಂ% ೆ ಪ ಮುಖ &ಾತ ವ15ರುAಾೆ. OೕEಾJP5ದ ಪ ಕರಣದ eಾಬು ಬಂUಾVಳ ಾ -ಾಂತರ Zೕ2ೕ\ qಾ'ಾBಾ8ಗಳ2L _,ಾ[% "ಾಖ25ದು# ,ಾವN"ೇ ಕ ಮ ೈ ೊಂ3ರುವN%ಲL. ಸ% "ಾಖEೆಗಳ ನಕಲುಗಳನು -ಾನI ಾI,ಾಲಯೆJ Kಾಜರು ಪ35ರುAೇೆ. 7. On a meticulous examination of the extracted portions of the private complaint, what evidently surfaces is that the principal allegations are directed against accused No.1. The complainant’s grievance, as reflected therein, is that - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 accused No.1, on the strength of a concocted and fabricated General Power of Attorney, managed to secure a Release Deed in his favour dated 29.03.2021. The gravamen of the accusation is thus squarely laid at the doorstep of accused No.1. 8. Insofar as the present petitioner, who has been arraigned as accused No.4, is concerned, the allegations in the complaint, when taken at their face value, do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Except for the averment that the petitioner, who is a practicing advocate, allegedly supported accused No.1 in the preparation of the disputed GPA, there are no specific or categorical allegations that demonstrate any dishonest inducement, fraudulent intent, or criminal breach of trust on his part. It is a well-settled principle that mere advice, professional assistance, or participation in the drafting or registration of a document by an advocate, without being a beneficiary or having a direct role in the alleged illegal gain, cannot by itself constitute an offence under Section 420 of IPC. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 9. The substance of the allegations, on a plain reading of the complaint as well as the prayers sought in the civil proceedings, clearly indicate that it is accused No.1 who has obtained the Release Deed on the basis of the impugned GPA dated 24.03.2021. The petitioner, on the other hand, is neither a beneficiary under the said documents nor has it been alleged that he derived any advantage therefrom. The complaint, therefore, appears to have unnecessarily dragged the petitioner into the criminal proceedings merely on the ground of his professional involvement as an advocate at the time of execution of the GPA. 10. This Court is therefore of the considered view that in the absence of any specific role attributed to the petitioner to demonstrate how the offences under Sections 406, 420, 463, 464, or 465 IPC are made out, continuation of the proceedings against him would amount to a misuse of the process of law. The allegations against accused No.1, if ultimately established, may certainly give rise to the question whether he has committed forgery or other cognizable offences in relation to transfer of the immovable property. That, however, is an issue - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 to be determined in the course of a full-fledged trial as against accused No.1. 11. As regards the petitioner, a practicing advocate, permitting the criminal proceedings to continue on the slender allegation that he had merely signed or supported the preparation of the GPA, without any further culpable role being ascribed to him, would not only be unwarranted but would also amount to harassment and an abuse of the process of Court. In the considered opinion of this Court, such proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed in exercise of the inherent powers vested under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 12. In the light of the foregoing discussion and for the reasons assigned supra, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33368 CRL.P No. 3137 of 2024 ii. The proceedings in FIR (Crime) No.119/2023 registered by the Bantwala Rural Police Station, Dakshina Kannada, for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 406, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, are hereby by quashed. iii. However, there shall be no impediment for the Investigating Officer to proceed against the other accused. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6