- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 1094 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR. H.J. SIWANI SON OF LATE J. K. SIWANI AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, HAVING OFFICE AT H. M. GENEVA, NO. 14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052. 2. MR. M. J. SIWANI SON OF LATE J. K. SIWANI AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, HAVING OFFICE AT H. M. GENEVA, NO. 14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIKRAM HUILGOL, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI. SYED KHAMRUDDIN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTHA POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY SPP OF HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE - 01. 2. MR. RAJAPPA Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 SON OF LATE SHAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT KUMBENA AGRAHARA KADOGUDI POST, BIDERAHALI, BENGALURU - 560 067. 3. MR. RAMUGOWDA SHEKAR @ RAMU V. SON OF MR. VENKATARAMA GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT GONIGATTIPURA VILLAGE, SARAJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 087. 4. SMT. CHINNAMMA WIFE OF LATE PAPAIAH READY, AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 257, 15 CROSS, BOREWELL ROAD, WHITEFIELD BENGLAURU - 560 080. 5. SENIOR SUB-REGISTRAR BOMMANAHALLI, 2ND FLOOR, 7TH CROSS, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BDA COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 034. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. LETHIF, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASHING THE C REPORT DATED 16.05.2025 IN CRIME NO. 27/2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Vikram Huilgol, learned Senior counsel along with Sri. Syed Khamruddin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri. B. Lethif, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1. 2. The petitioners / complainants No.1 and 2 are before this Court calling in question an order of the concerned Court, which accepts the 'C' report filed by the jurisdictional Police without hearing them. 3. Facts in brief germane are as follows: The first petitioner files a complaint before the Whitefield Police on 03.10.2020 alleging forgery and fabrication of documents, which becomes a crime in crime No.27/2020. The Police conduct and file a 'C' report before the concerned Court. The 'C' report is accepted and the proceedings are closed by - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 the concerned Court on 23.10.2025. It is this action of the concerned Court that is called in question by the petitioners. 4. Sri. Vikram Huilgol, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that the concerned Court ought to have heard the petitioners prior to accepting the 'C' report and closing the proceedings. The proceedings have thus ended in blatant violation of principles of natural justice. In that light, the learned Senior counsel submits that if the matter is remitted back to the hands of the concerned Court, to hear these petitioners and pass necessary orders would suffice for the present. 5. Sri. B. Lethif, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, would though refute the submissions, but admit the fact that the petitioners/complainants were not heard prior to the acceptance of the 'C' report and closure of the proceedings. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the available material on record. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 7. The afore-narrated contentions qua the facts at this juncture lie in a narrow compass. The contention of the petitioners is that they being the complainants, the concerned Court ought not to have closed the proceedings, without hearing these petitioners. Therefore, there is no necessity for a deeper delving into the matter in the present proceedings, as the threshold illegality of violation of principles of natural justice would lead to the obliteration of the closure of the proceedings on acceptance of the 'C' report. The orders of the concerned Court reads as follows: "Place it before the Hon'ble XXIII Addl. City Civil Judge and Special Judge, and Prevention of Corruption Act, Bangalore. Sd/- 17/2/25 Registrar City Civil Court, Bengaluru 22.07.2025 State by-PP 'C' final report filed. 28/8/25 State by PP Notice to IO & Complainant - issued to hear on 'C' final report. Issue notice to the complainant and I.O returnable by 22.08.2025. Case is called out. The IO is present. The jurisdictional police placed the report with the submission of non tracing of the defacto complainant, as if he - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 25/9/2025 State by PP Notice to defacto Complainant - issued. 23/10/25 State by PP Notice to defacto Complainant - issued. hs given the wrong address. However, Office is to issue notice on 'C' report to the defacto complainant finally by 25.09.2025 Case is called out. Re issue notice on C report to the defact complainant by 23.10.2025. Case is called out. The I.O. is present. As per the Police report the whereabouts of the defacto complainant is not known since he is informed to have been not found in the given address. Heard the I.O. on 'C' report. So far as the defact complainant is concerned, there is no other option to the court, but to accept the 'C' report, for the reasons assigned by the I.O. Accordingly, the 'C' report is accepted and proceedings are - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 closed." Only the Investigating Officer is heard, while accepting the 'C' report and closing the proceedings. It is an admitted fact that these petitioners were the complainants, which becomes a crime in crime No.27/2020. Therefore, whether it is a 'B' report or a 'C' report filed by the Investigating Officers or filed by the Police, those proceedings could not have been terminated without at the outset issuing a notice and hearing these petitioners. The closure being in violation of principles of natural justice necessarily needs to be obliterated. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed-in-part. (ii) The order accepting the 'C' report and closing the proceedings stands quashed. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the hands of the concerned Court to hear these petitioners and pass necessary orders on the 'C' report. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11968 WP No. 1094 of 2026 (iv) All contentions remain open to be urged by the petitioners before the concerned Court. (v) The concerned Court shall regulate its procedure in accordance with law. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35