- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MAY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7047 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. H.C.LOKESHWARI AGED 54 YEARS, W/O. SRI. SANJAY B.C., ADVOCATE, OFFICE AT NO.404, RANKA PARK APARTMENTS, LALBAGH ROAD, NEAR RICHMOND CIRCLE, BANGALORE 560027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY WOMEN POLICE STATION, CENTRAL DIVISION, BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE 560001. 2. SMT. GARIMA MISHRA, AGED 43 YEARS, D/O. SRI. ASHOK MISHRA, W/O. SRI. APARMAYA SHUKLA, CURRENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT E-5, 903, SNN RAJ GREENBAY APARTMENTS, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-2, BENGALURU 560100. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHOAIB SANGATARSH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 BEFORE THE WOMEN POLICE STATION, CENTRAL DIVISION, BANGALORE ON 29.04.2026 AND FURTHER COMPLAINT DATED 02.05.2026 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE M AND R REFERENCE AND ALSO QUASH THE BEARING NOTICE NO. San.KE.Ma.Po/LPT/143/2026 DATED 30.04.2026 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-P. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER The petition is filed seeking following reliefs: "For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the complaint lodged by Respondent No.2 before the Women Police Station, Central Division, Bangalore on 29.04.2026 and further complaint dated 02.05.2026 produced at Annexure M and R and also quash the notice bearing reference No. San.KE.Ma.Po/LPT/143/2026 dated 30.04.2026 produced at Annexure -P, and grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the ends of equity and justice." - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 2. Case of the petitioner is that she is a practicing Advocate having more than 26 years of standing in the bar. That she is representing one Sri.Aparmaya Shukla, the husband of respondent No.2 herein in G& WC No.35/2021 pending on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District in a dispute for custody over minor child. 3. That the marital discord between said Sri.Aparmaya Shukla and respondent No.2 has resulted in multiple litigations between them. 4. Respondent No.2 had initiated proceedings under Domestic Violence Act as well as under Section 498A of IPC against said Sri.Aparmaya Shukla and family members. Both the proceedings have been quashed by this Court. 5. There are several interim orders passed by trial Courts and this Court regarding visitation rights, custody arrangements and interaction between said Sri.Aparmaya Shukla and the minor child. That Sri.Aparmaya Shukla had filed an application dated 27.03.2026 seeking interim custody - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 of the minor child during summer vacation which is being contested by respondent No.2. 6. That the petitioner herein has represented Sri.Aparmaya Shukla in all these proceedings. The respondent No.2 has consistently exhibited intemperate, aggressive and abusive conduct within the court premises. She has even made personal remarks against the petitioner before the trial Court and the trial Court on multiple occasion had directed respondent No.2 to address the Court only through her counsel without causing any interruption. Yet respondent No.2 continued with her acts of passing derogative comments and personal insinuation against the petitioner in the presence of other advocates. 7. That on 29.04.2026 after hearing the application the trial Court had expressed inability to pass the orders due to ensuing summer holidays. After the Presiding Officer retiring to the chamber Advocate for the respondent left the Court Hall, and the petitioner herein along with her colleague after verifying the order sheet of the case came out of the Court Hall. At that time respondent No.2 rushed towards the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 petitioner abusing and passing deeply offensive remarks against the petitioner stating that the petitioner would suffer for rest of her life for having argued the case against her. In furtherance thereof she has proceeded and filed a complaint before the Women Police Station, Central Division, Bangalore falsely alleging petitioner having abused her and stated to "go and die" and "give the child". 8. The said police on 30.04.2026 forwarded a notice to the petitioner calling upon her to appear for enquiry before the police station on 02.05.2026 at 11 a.m. 9. The petitioner on 02.05.2026 filed detailed affidavit before the trial Court bringing to its notice the events that transpired on 02.05.2026. Also the lodging of the false complaint by respondent No.2 against the petitioner. 10. Respondent No.2 has filed further complaint on 02.05.2026 against the petitioner and her colleague withdrawing part of earlier complaint dated 29.04.2026. That the petitioner has submitted a detailed reply to the police. Being aggrieved by the above turn of events, present petition seeking relief as noted above. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 11. Heard and perused the records. 12. Two complaints dated 29.04.2026 and 02.05.2026 filed by respondent No.2 - de facto complainant before respondent No.1-police read as under: First Complaint dated 29.04.2026 "I was coming out of court hall after attending the case. Lokeshwari and colleague have harassed me and shouted on me in court hall lobby. You can check camera recording for the same. 1.45 PM to 2.30 PM dated 29 April 2026. This is second time in court complex I have been harassed. Please take strict action on this as Lokeshwari has a habit of passing personal comments on me even outside court hall. Last time in court hall she has passed comments and its keep going on. "Go and die" "Give the child and get out". I just asked till when cases will run." Second Complaint dated 02.05.2026 "I would like to inform about subject for my complaint on 29 April 2026. By mistake on dated 29 April 2026 the subject like "Ravishankar Firm" was used a counter name. This was only mentioned for address of Lokeshwari's office purpose. Mr.Ravi Shankar (Advocate) was not involved. Computer complaint copy by mistake the counter name was mentioned. Please rectify and remove his name (Ravi Shankar Advocate) from counter name. I came for clarification and rectification purpose delay due to person work and attaching LPT No.143/2026 cases dated 29 April 2026 received complaint copy." 13. There is no dispute of the fact that the petitioner herein is representing the husband of respondent no.2 in a proceedings in G & WC.No.35/2021 pending consideration before the Family Court. Allegation, as seen in the complaint, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 extracted above do not make out any case, muchless prima facie case worthy of keeping on record, let alone subjecting for enquiry and trial. 14. Respondent - Police without application of mind, as rightly pointed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, has issued a notice calling upon the petitioner as well as her Senior to appear for enquiry. 15. Needless to say that if filing of complaints of this nature and consequent enquiries are permitted to continue, such practice would embolden unprincipled litigants to cause impediments in advocates fraternity in discharging their duties towards their client effectively. 16. Though much has been stated in the petition on the alleged conduct of respondent No.2, this Court refrain from making any observation thereon. 17. Learned counsel for the respondent after going through the records more particularly the complaints, is unable to point out any case warranting continuation of the proceedings in furtherance to the said complaints. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24753 CRL.P No. 7047 of 2026 18. The contents of the complaints as noted above do not make out any case against the petitioner. The respondent No.1-police ought to have cautious before blindly issuing the notice calling upon the petitioner and her colleague to appear for enquiry. 19. This Court therefore is of the view that filing of the above complaints, issuance of notice by the respondent No.1- police is nothing but sheer abuse of process of law. 20. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The complaints dated 29.04.2026 and 02.05.2026 and the notice dated 30.04.2026 are quashed. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 96