- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9055 OF 2021 BETWEEN: 1. SRI UMESHA A H S/O LATE HOMBAHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS NO.212, III MAIN BCMC LAYOUT RAGHUVANAHALLI KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU 560 062 ALSO AT AS PER PCR DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER LABOUR DEPARTMENT KARMIKA BHAVANA BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE CITY-560076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.C.R.GOPALASWAMY SR.ADVOCATE FOR SRI.G.BHARGAV.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY LOKAYUKTA, P.S, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001 (AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 31.10.2025) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 2. SRI RAVIKUMARA KANCHANAHALLI S/O LATE SRI KONEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT KANCHANAHALLI VILLAGE KABBALU POST SATHANURU HOBLI KANAKAPURA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562126. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B B PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2-SRI.RAVIKUMAR KANCHANAHALLI (PARTY IN PERSON) (ABSENT)) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS UNDER CRIME NO.12/2021 DATED ON 20/09/2021 OF ANTI CORRUPTION BEURO (ACB), RAMANAGARA DISTRICT ARISING OUT OF DATED ON 18/09/2021 IN PCR NO.5001/2021 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 13 OF PREVENTION OF ANTI CORRUPTION ACT, 1988, PENDING ON THE FILE FO THE 2ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, RAMANAGAR DISTRICT, SITTING AT KANAKAPURA, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 ORAL ORDER The criminal petition is filed with the following prayer: "Quash the entire proceedings under Crime No.12/2021 dated on 20/9/2021 of Anti Corruption Beuro (ACB). Ramanagara District arising out of dated on 18/9/2021 in P.C.R.No.5001/2021, for the offences punishable under section 13 of Prevention of Anti Corruption Act, 1988, pending on the file of the 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara District, sitting at Kanakapura, in the interest of justice." 2. The case of the petitioner is that when he was working as a Deputy Labour Commissioner, out of ill will respondent No.2 made a false complaint against him under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Cr.PC) to the Jurisdictional Magistrate II Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara District sitting at Kanakapura. It is submitted that the said complaint was not accompanied by an affidavit as required under law and is in violation of the procedure prescribed in - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 the case of Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287. Subsequent to filing of the complaint, the same has been referred to police investigation and the police have registered an FIR bearing Crime No.12/2021. It is also submitted that subsequent to filing of the complaint, a departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner and on merits, he has been exonerated by the Lokayuktha. On the said grounds, it is prayed that the petition be allowed. 3. The learned counsel for respondent No.1, upon instructions, is unable to dispute the fact that the petitioner is a government servant, that the private complaint lodged against him is not accompanied by an affidavit as mandated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others; and that the petitioner has been exonerated in the departmental enquiry conducted by the Upa-lokayuktha. However, he contends that the petitioner - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 is guilty of the offences alleged, as all the witnesses have not been examined in the departmental enquiry and the departmental enquiry has not been conducted properly. For the said reason, he prays that the criminal petition be dismissed. 4. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others case laid down the guidelines as to the manner in which a complaint is to be filed before a private complaint is to be filed before the Magistrate and how a reference has to be made under Section 156(3) of Cr.PC. It mandates that the private complaint has to be accompanied by an affidavit. This is done with the purpose of avoiding frivolous complaints that are made against the public servants. Many a time a decision will have to be taken by the public servants and the said decision will be done in a bona fide manner, which will be adverse to the interest of some persons. With malafide intent, the aggrieved person, instead of having the same redressed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 by challenging it before the appropriate authority, may choose to file a frivolous private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.PC and harass the public servant. In such an eventuality, the public servant requires to be protected. If the complainant is to file an affidavit, then in that event, he can subsequently be prosecuted for filing a false complaint. Hence, the safeguards have been laid down in Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others case. Admittedly, in the instant case, such an affidavit was not filed along with a private complaint and the trial Court could not have entertained the same. It is seen that the trial Court has acted more as a postman by blindly referring the complaint for investigation under Section 156(3) of Cr.PC. Further, the petitioner has been exonerated in the department proceedings. It is not disputed by respondent No.1 that it has attained finality. It is seen that he has been exonerated on merits in a disciplinary proceedings, which needs to be proved by the prosecution on preponderance - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43866 CRL.P No. 9055 of 2021 of probabilities, which is a lesser degree of proof that is required than in the criminal case, where it is required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, the question of prosecuting the petitioner in the instant case does not arise. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The Criminal Petition is hereby allowed. ii. Proceedings in Crime No.12/2021 arising out of PCR No.5001/2021, pending on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara District sitting at Kanakapura, stand quashed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1