- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34654 CRL.P No. 2127 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2127 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. CHITRASHEKARAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT VHELUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, BANAVARAHOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUKA, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 112. 2. ESHWARAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O NAGARALU, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 175. 3. HEMACHANDRA S/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.500, 2ND CROSS, 8TH MAIN, SADANAND NAGAR, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU - 560 038. 4. NAGARAJU S/O SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, 5. SMT. USHA W/O NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, PETITIONERS NO.4 & 5 ARE R/AT CHELUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, BANAVARA HOBLI, Digitally signed by ANUSHA V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34654 CRL.P No. 2127 of 2019 ARASIKERE TALUKA, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 112. …PETITIONERS [BY SRI PRABHUGOUD B TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE (PH)] AND: 1. GANESH S/O BASAVARAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O CHELUVANAHALLI, BANAVARA HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUKA, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 112. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY BANAVARA POLICE STATION, ARASIKERE RURAL CIRCLE, HASSAN, REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RP SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE FO R1 (AB); SRI S JAVEED, HCGP FO R2 (PH)] THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS REGISTERED IN C.C.NO.3589/2016 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES U/S 323, 324, 506 R/W 149 OF IPC ARISNG OUT OF PCR.NO.114/2015 NOW THE CASE IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARSIKERE, HASSAN DISTRICT AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5/PETITIONER NO.1 TO 5. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34654 CRL.P No. 2127 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL ORDER Challenging entire proceedings in CC no.3589/2016 on file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere, Hassan District in pursuance of PCR no.114/2015 filed by respondent no.1 - complainant alleging offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 506 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), this petition is filed. 2. Sri Prabhugoud B. Tumbigi, learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners were accused no.1 to 5 in PCR no.114/2015. In said complaint, it was stated that at 11:00 a.m., on 08.10.2015 when complainant was returning home by loading coconut on his bullock cart, accused who had enmity with complainant suddenly blocked road and began abusing him in foul language by stating that there was no right of way. They did not stop despite complainant informing them that it was earlier cart-way used by villagers. But accused no.1 abused complainant and hit him on his face. Even other accused beat him on his hands and legs. While accused no.2 and 3 beat him with club. Accused no.4 and 5 hit him with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34654 CRL.P No. 2127 of 2019 stone. Even complainant's father, who was with him was also abused and assaulted. Thereafter, threatened to kill complainant and thereby committed offences punishable under Section 323, 324, 506 of IPC and sought for action. 3. It was submitted that though complaint was filed, an affidavit of complainant containing material allegations against accused was not filed, which was held mandatory by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava and Anr., v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors., reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287, it was submitted, non-compliance was fatal and sought for allowing petition. 4. Sri Javeed S., learned HCGP for respondent no.2 - State is unable to controvert submissions. 5. It is seen that said contention has been specifically urged as a ground in petition. Even on previous occasion, learned counsel had urged said ground and relied upon decision in Priyanka Srivastava's case and though counsel for respondents had sought time to respond, there is no representation for complainant. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34654 CRL.P No. 2127 of 2019 6. This petition is by accused challenging proceedings in pursuance of a private complaint on ground of non-filing of affidavit of complainant. 7. Perusal of certified copy of private complaint produced along with petition does not indicate filing of affidavit. Moreover, when complaint appears to have been filed before learned Magistrate on 20.11.2015 it is endorsed as follows: "Complainant present. Presents complaint. Perused. Cognizance taken. Office to register as PCR and for Sworn Statement call on 21.12.2015." 8. Said endorsement would leave no doubt that learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of offences. 9. Non-filing of affidavit is curable upto stage of taking cognizance of offences. Since learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences on 20.11.2015 itself and there is apparent non-compliance with requirement of filing of affidavit. In view of ratio in Priyanka Srivastava's case (supra), entire proceedings would require to be quashed as abuse of process. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34654 CRL.P No. 2127 of 2019 10. Accordingly, petition is allowed, proceedings in CC no.3589/2016 on file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Arsikere, Hassan District in pursuance of PCR no.114/2015 stand quashed. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE GRD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16