PRABHAKAR @ RAJAREDDY @ RAJA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
CRL.P/1798/2025 · 2025-10-13
Mohammad Nawaz
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 91923 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 91923 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40276 CRL.P No. 1798 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1798 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1.
PRABHAKAR @ RAJAREDDY @ RAJA S/O MUNIREDDY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.07 CHOUKAHALLI VILLAGE BYRAMANGALA POST BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGAR TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562159.
2.
LAKSHMAN REDDY.C S/O CHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
3.
MR GOPI REDDY C S/O CHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
4.
SMT. RADHAMMA W/O CHANDRA REDDY AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.2/66 KOMARANAPALLI VILLAGE BYALAGANDAPALLI POST DENKANIKOTE TALUK KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT 635122 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BHASKAR C R., ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40276 CRL.P No. 1798 of 2025
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BOMMANAHALLI POLICE REP BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX BANGALORE 560001.
2.
SMT. SUMA W/O GANGADHAR REDDY D/O KRISHNA REDDY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS RESIDENT AT NO. 144 MUNIREDDY LAYOUT NEAR DHYANA MANDIRA HONGASANDRA,
BANGALORE 560068 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT IN CR.NO.65/2022 AT ANNEXURE-A AND B FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 448, 323, 324, 307, 354, 504, 506 IPC R/W 34 OF IPC ON THE FILES OF THE LXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS, JUDGE BANGALORE (CCH-72) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40276 CRL.P No. 1798 of 2025
ORAL ORDER Learned HCGP is directed to take notice for respondent-State. 1. The petitioners are seeking to quash the proceedings pending against them in S.C.No.273/2023 on the file of the LXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.65/2022 of Bommanahalli Police Station, Bengaluru City. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that admittedly there is a civil dispute between the parties and the said dispute has been given a cloak of criminal offence. He contended that the ingredients of the offences alleged in the FIR are not made out and these petitioners are falsely implicated in the case. He further contended that the medical records are fabricated, and there is no external injuries sustained by the injured namely the complainant and her mother and without any sufficient material, the Police have filed the charge sheet. It is also contended that the present complaint lodged by
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40276 CRL.P No. 1798 of 2025
respondent No.2 is a counter blast to the complaint lodged against her father, wherein a case was registered at Mattigiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District on 14.03.2022. 3. The complaint averments do reveal that there is a civil dispute between the parties in relation to certain properties, situated in Kumaranahalli Village, Denkanikote Taluk, Krishnagiri District, Tamilnadu. That itself is not a ground to disbelieve the complaint averments, as it is stated that in view of the said civil dispute, on 22.03.2022 at 01.00 p.m., the accused have trespassed into complainant’s house, threatened, assaulted and also outraged her modesty, etc. The charge sheet has been filed in this case. 4. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioners have filed an application seeking to discharge them from the case and the said application is pending before the Sessions Court. - 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40276 CRL.P No. 1798 of 2025
5. At this stage, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. The petitioners can pursue their application filed before the Trial Court, seeking discharge. It is always open for them to challenge the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge on the said application. 6. Keeping open all the contentions to be raised in the application filed by the petitioners seeking discharge, the petition is dismissed. I.A.No.1/2025 is dismissed.
Sd/- (MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE
DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 37