Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 84164 (KAR)

KEMPANNA SHANKAR HIREKODI v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/103725/2025 · 2025-09-15

S Vishwajith Shetty

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103725 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. KEMPANNA SHANKAR HIREKODI, AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANAWADI, TQ. RAIBAG, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 103. 2. SHRIKANT SHANKAR HIREKODI, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANAWADI, TQ. RAIBAG, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 103. 3. SHIVAPPA @ SHIVAJI SHANKAR HIREKODI, AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANAWADI, TQ. RAIBAG, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 103. 4. VITTAL KEMPANNA HIREKODI, AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANAWADI, TQ. RAIBAG, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 103. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. U.J. HAVALDAR, ADVOCATE) RAKESH S HARIHAR Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH RAIBAG POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI, R/BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580 001. 2. SHRI. SHRIMANT SATAPPA MUDALAGI, AGE. 45 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KANKANAWADI, TQ. RAIBAG, DIST. BELAGAVI-591 103. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS CRIMINAL PETITION AND THEREBY QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.208/2023 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 RAIBAG POLICE STATION, RAIBAG, DISTRICT BELAGAVI, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) AND JMFC COURT, RAIBAG, BELAGAVI DISTRICT AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED AND RECORD AND ACCEPT THE COMPROMISE ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS AND THE RESPONDENT NO.2/COMPLAINANT AND PERMIT THE PARTIES TO COMPOUND THE OFFENCES. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) 1. The petitioners are before this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.208 of 2023 registered by Raibag Police Station, Athani Sub Division, Belagavi District for the offences punishable under Sections 149, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 149 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 submit that the dispute between the parties relates to certain immovable properties and the said dispute has been now amicably settled between the parties at the intervention of elders and well- wishers of both parties. The parties have now filed application before this Court seeking permission to compound the alleged offences. They accordingly pray to allow the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 3. Per contra, learned HCGP, who has appeared on behalf of respondent No.1 brings to the notice of this Court that the FIR has been registered for non-compoundable offences. 4. Perusal of the first information dated 23.06.2023 submitted by respondent No.2, which has resulted in registering FIR in Crime No.208 of 2023 by Raibag Police Station, Belagavi District for the aforesaid offences against the petitioners herein would go to show that the allegation against the petitioners is that in respect of the property bearing Survey Nos. 31/1, 31/2, 31/3, 31/4, 31/5, 31/6 and 31/7, which originally belonged to the grandfather of the first informant, the petitioners with an intention to cheat the first informant had created fraudulent documents and based on the same, revenue entries of the aforesaid lands were changed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 have jointly submitted - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 that the aforesaid dispute between the parties is amicably settled at the intervention of the elders and well-wishers of both parties and they intend to give quietus to the disputes between themselves. 6. The parties who are present before the Court have been identified by their respective advocates. The application filed by the parties under Section 359 of the BNSS, 2023 seeking permission of this Court to compound the alleged offences is taken on record. The said application is signed by the parties and also their respective advocates. 7. In paragraph Nos.3 to 5 of the application, it is stated as follows: “3. This being the case, the elders and well- wishers of the parties have advised the parties to settle their inter-se dispute by way of an amicable settlement. 4. It is submitted that, as such the parties have agreed to bury their hatchet and settle the inter-se dispute among themselves and as such the Complainant/Respondent No.2 has agreed to withdraw all the allegations made as against the Petitioners and that the Respondent No.2 has no objections for the aforesaid offences being quashed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 by this Hon'ble Court pursuant to the compromise arrived at between the Parties. 5. It is submitted that, in view of the law laid down the by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 in cases of non-compoundable cases of predominantly civil dispute in nature can be quashed by this Hon'ble Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in the parties have arrived at a settlement between themselves.” 8. The parties who are present before the Court have stated that settlement between the parties is voluntary, without there being any undue influence and coercion. 9. In the case of The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of RAMGOPAL AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that, notwithstanding the limitations provided under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., considering the nature of allegations and the nature of settlement between the parties, can quash criminal proceedings even registered for 1 AIR 2022 (14) SCC 531 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 non-compoundable offences. The dispute between the parties is with regard to certain immovable properties and the allegations appear to be private in nature. The said allegations are also not of grave in nature. The parties who are all residents of the same village have settled the dispute between themselves at the intervention of the elders and well-wishers of both the parties and they intend to give quietus to the dispute and live peacefully in future. 10. Under the circumstances, this is a fit case, wherein this Court needs to exercise its powers under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 in order to do complete justice. Accordingly, the following: ORDER (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The entire proceedings in Crime No.208 of 2023 registered by Raibag Police Station, Athani Sub Division, Belagavi District for the offences punishable under Sections - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12036 CRL.P No. 103725 of 2025 149, 420, 465, 468, 471 and 149 of IPC is quashed as against the petitioners herein. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE VNP / CT: BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 51