- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29058 CRL.P No. 4622 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4622 OF 2021 BETWEEN: SMT. SHARADAMMA W/O LATE RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, R/AT NO.72/2, ARVIND NAGARA, 12TH CROSS, OIL MILL ROAD, BANGALORE - 84. …PETITIONER (BY SRI BASAVANNA M.D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS BANNERGHATTA POLICE STATION, BANGALORE DISTRICT, REP. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF BUILDING COMPLEX, BANGALORE-01. 2. THE TAHASILDAR BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, KANDAYA BHAVANA, GROUND FLOOR, K.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 09. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.R.PATIL, HCGP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH FIR NO.139/2020 FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/S 192-A OF KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT, 1964 R/W 465,468,471 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, ANEKAL, BANGALORE Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29058 CRL.P No. 4622 of 2021 URBAN DISTRICT AND COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 2nd RESPONDENT ARE PRODUCED UNDER ANNEXURE-A AND B NOW THE SAME IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF MAGISTRATE AT BANGALORE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging proceedings initiated in pursuance of FIR no.139/2020 for offence punishable under Section 192(A) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 (KLR Act) and Sections 465, 468 and 479 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) on file of Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Anekal, Bangalore Rural, as per Annexures-A and B, this petition is filed. 2. Sri Basavanna MD., learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner herein is accused no.35 and principal ground of challenge was that this Court, in its judgment, in Smt.Lalitha Sastry v. State of Karnataka reported in ILR 2008 KAR 4520 had held prior to initiation of proceedings under Section 192(A) of KLR Act, issuance of notice, providing opportunity to file objections, conduct of spot inspection and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29058 CRL.P No. 4622 of 2021 drawing up of mahazar, etc., was mandatory. On ground of non-compliance, proceedings were liable to be quashed. 3. Sri MR Patil, learned HCGP, though opposed petition, does not dispute position of law in view of decision in Smt.Lalitha Sastry's case (supra). 4. Heard learned counsel and perused material on record. 5. At outset, there is no dispute about initiation of proceedings against petitioner under Section 192(A) of KLR Act. Perusal of complaint does not indicate compliance with procedure to be followed prior to initiation of proceedings as held by this Court in Smt.Lalitha Sastry's case (supra) either in letter or spirit. Except a bare assertion that notice was issued and no objections were raised, there is no mention about conduct of spot inspection and drawing up of mahazar, thereby establishing violation of procedure mandated. 6. In view of above, petition stands allowed; proceedings initiated in pursuance of FIR no.139/2020 for offences punishable under Section 192(A) of KLR Act and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29058 CRL.P No. 4622 of 2021 Sections 465, 468 and 479 of IPC, on file of Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Anekal, Bangalore Rural, as per Annexures-A and B, are quashed with liberty to State/Authorities to comply with requirement prior to initiation of action against petitioner. In view of disposal of petition, pending applications, if any, also stand disposed. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37