- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10942 OF 2022 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: YASIN S/O MOHAMMED AKBAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT WARD NO. 6, MEHABOOB NAGAR, KOLAR ROAD, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KARTHIK B Y, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE SUB INSPECTOR TOWN POLICE, CHICKBALLAPUR REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT BUILDINGS BANGALORE-560 001 2. ADMINISTRATIVE SHERISTHEDAR PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT CHICKBALLAPUR …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1; Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 SRI.S.V.SHIVALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.380/2019 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IMPLICATING THE PETITIONER FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 193 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND C.J.M., CHIKKABALLAPUR ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI ORAL ORDER In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioner, who is examined as PW-9 in SPl.SC.No.23/2015, on the file of I Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapur, wherein, by order dated 28.01.2015, the said Court directed the Administrative Sheristedar to file a complaint under Section 195(1)(b)(i) r/w Section 340 (1)(b) of CrP.C, against him for the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 offence Punishable under Section 193 of IPC, is seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings, initiated against him in C.C.No.380/2019, arising out of PCR.No.1/2019, on the file of Prl.Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chikkaballapura. 2. In support of the petition, petitioner has contended that in Cr.No.13/2015, of Chikkaballapura Town Police, charge sheet came to be filed in Spl.SC.No.23/2015 on the file of I Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Chikkaballapura for the offences punishable under Sections 354–A r/w 34 IPC and Sections 11 and 12 of POCSO Act. On 05.05.2015, as a SPA holder of Manjunath. Petitioner filed an application along with Special Power of Attorney and Vakalath. In pursuance of the order passed by the trial Court, he executed an indemnity bond for ₹2 lakhs on 07.05.2015 and got released Maruti Omni bearing Registration No.KA-01–MA–7826. Accordingly, the investigating officer released the said vehicle to the custody of petitioner after taking colour photographs of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 petitioner along with the vehicle. In the charge sheet he is cited as CW-10. 2.1 With regard to the same, petitioner was summoned to give evidence. On 03.09.2019, petitioner gave evidence as PW-9. He admitted his signature in the application at Ex.P18, in SPA at Ex.P19, Vakalath at Ex.P20, indemnity bond at Ex.P17 and his photograph in Ex.P17(a). Since he is an uneducated person, he denied the contents of the said exhibits. On the same day, the trial Court has held that he has given false evidence and ordered for registering of complaint. On 24.06.2020, the accused in Sp.SC.No.23/2015 is acquitted. Petitioner is uneducated person working as a car mechanic. He never faced any Court proceedings. He became nervous and was not able to understand the questions posed to him. Before initiating the said proceedings, petitioner was not given notice. Turning hostile would not amount to giving false evidence and hence the petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 3. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioners has relied upon the following decisions: (i) N.S.Nandiesha Reddy Vs. Kavitha Mahesh (N.S.Nandiesha Reddy)1 (ii) Shri.Tippesh Sanna Halappa Vs. State of Karnataka Rep. by HESCOM Vigilance P.S., Belgaum (Tippesh Sanna Halappa)2 (iii) James Kunjwal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Anr. (James Kunjwal)3 4. On the other hand, learned High Court Government Pleader representing the respondent State would submit that petitioner in his capacity as the Special Power of Attorney holder of Manjunath the RC holder of Maruti Omni vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-01–MA– 7826 got it released from the trial Court by executing indemnity bond. At the time of releasing the vehicle, as per the terms of the release order, the investigating officer captured the photographs of the vehicle along with the 1 AIR 2021 SC 4885 SC 2 ILR 2011 KAR 1832 3 (2024) 8 SCR 332: 2024 INSC 201 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 petitioner to be used as evidence without insisting for production of the vehicle itself. Petitioner was cited as CW- 9. At the trial, he was examined as PW-10. Instead of speaking with regard to the fact of he getting the vehicle released, except identifying his signatures in the relevant documents, petitioner has failed to speak with regard to the said aspect and turned hostile to help the accused. Therefore, rightly the trial Court has directed the registration of the case against him for the offence punishable under Section 193 Cr.P.C. In the light of the fact that the said proceedings was before the trial Court, there was no necessity to conduct any preliminary enquiry and rightly, the trial Court directed registration of the case. Prima facie there is material to proceed against the petitioner. Of course, it is open for him to take any valid defence at the trial and pray to dismiss the petition. 5. Heard arguments and perused the record. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 6. Cr.No.13/2015 of Chikkaballapura Town PS came to be registered for the offence punishable under Section 354-A r/w 34 IPC and Sections 11 and 12 of the POCSO Act. Against a child-in-conflict with law, accused No.2 Rakesh and accused No.3 Ashok, on the allegations that they used to follow and eve tease CWs-2 and 3 after they left the school and also gave threat when they did not respond to them positively. They were making gestures by hand and whistling and also abuse them in filthy language and caused harassment every day. On 27.01.2015, while they were waiting for the bus near the old bus stop the child-in-conflict with law and also accused No.2 engaged in eve teasing. When their brother Chhuda Reddy tried to catch them, they escaped. After 10 minutes, they came in Maruti Omni bearing Registration No.KA-01–MA–7826 along with 3 to 4 persons and gave threat to CW-2 and also their brother. They were also used to tease CWs-2 and 3 by riding a hero Honda bike No.KA–01–2027. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 7. During investigation, the concerned police have seized Maruti Omni bearing Registration No.KA-01–MA– 7826 belonging to one Manjunath. As stated in the petition itself, it is an undisputed fact that petitioner got released the said Maruti Omni bearing registration number KA–01– MA–9826. The application filed by him under Section 451 r/w 457 Cr.P.C, as the power of attorney, indemnity bond, which bear the photographs of himself and the surety, as well as the Vakalath signed by him are marked at the trial as per Exs.P18, 19, 17 and 20 respectively. The photographs of the vehicle along with him were also marked. He was also examined as a PW-10. During the course of his evidence instead of speaking about the fact of he filing the application in his capacity as the Special Power of Attorney Holder of the owner of the vehicle, and got the vehicle released to his custody and also executed the indemnity bond, he has turned Hostile. He has expressed ignorance with regard to the contentions of the relevant documents. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 8. Consequently, the trial Court has rightly directed registration of case against him for giving false evidence. There is prima facie material on record for the trial Court to come to such conclusion. Hence, there was no need for holding an enquiry by issuing notice to the petitioner. Rightly the trial Court has directed registration of the complaint against the petitioner. Hence, it cannot be held that the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner would amount to abuse of the process of the Court, calling for interference by this Court. The decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for petitioner are not applicable to the case on hand. Of course, the petitioner is at liberty to take any legal defence that would be available to him at the trial. In the light of above discussions, this Court is of the considered opinion that petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32522 CRL.P No. 10942 of 2022 ORDER (i) Petition filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C is hereby rejected. (ii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court through email. Sd/- (J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42