Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29823 (KAR)

SHAILA SURESH BABU SHET v. MR. SRIRAMALU NAIDU

WP/20111/2026 · 2026-07-13

M Nagaprasanna

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35314 WP No. 20111 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 20111 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SHAILA SURESH BABU SHET W/O SURESH BABU CHANDRAN AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS HAVING PERMANENT ADDRESS AT 12-5-542, DONGERKERY MANGALURU-575003 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT ABU DHABI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN B S., ADVOCATE) AND: MR. SRIRAMALU NAIDU S/O LATE BABU NAIDU AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/AT RAMA BHAVAN COMPLEX KODIALBAIL, MANGALURU-575003 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. GIRISH BHARADWAJ., ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT DATED 16.02.2026 AND THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN PCR NO.45/2026 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE JMFC (II COURT), MANGALURU, REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 356, 356(2), 356(3) AND 3(5) OF THE BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023, PURSUANT TO THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BY Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35314 WP No. 20111 of 2026 RESPONDENT NO. 1, SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED ONLY AS PER ANNEXURES-A AND B AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. B.S. Sachin, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Girish Bharadwaj, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and have perused the material on record. 2. The petitioner is before this Court, seeking the following prayer: "a. Quash the private complaint dated 16.02.2026 and the entire proceedings in PCR No.45/2026 pending on the file of the JMFC (II Court), Mangaluru, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Section 356, 356(2), 356(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pursuant to the private complaint filed by pursuant to the complaint filed by Respondent No.1 insofar as petitioner concerned only as per Annexures-A and B; b. Pass such other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity." 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the case of the co-accused, this Court has - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35314 WP No. 20111 of 2026 passed the following order in Crl.P.No.6703/2026 on 03.07.2026: “Petitioners are before this Court seeking to quash the complaint dated 16-02-2026 and entire proceedings in PCR No.45 of 2026 pending on the file of JMFC II Court, Mangaluru. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri Sachin B.S., appearing for petitioners and learned counsel Sri Girish Bharadwaj appearing for the respondent. 3. A private complaint comes to be filed by the respondent against the petitioners herein and two others, for offences punishable under Section 356, 356(2), 356(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 i.e., Sections 499 and 500 of the earlier regime, the IPC. The moment the complaint is registered or even before the ink on the complaint could dry, the petitioners are before this Court calling in question the said proceedings, on the score that it causes grave prejudice to the petitioners. This Court, on 02-06-2026, granted an interim order of stay of further proceedings qua petitioner No.3. 4. The issue is admittedly at a pre-cognizance stage, therefore all the rights would be available to the petitioners to knock at the doors of the appropriate fora, in the event the concerned Court would take cognizance, in accordance with law or contrary to law, as the case would be. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35314 WP No. 20111 of 2026 5. Therefore, reserving such liberty to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum at a later point in time, keeping all contentions open, the petition stands disposed.” 4. In the light of the order so passed by this Court qua the co-accused, the petition stands disposed reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum at a later point in time. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 243