- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 36799 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: DR. RANYA SRINIDHI BHARADWAJ AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 27, VYASA NILAYA, 13TH MAIN, JAGRUTHI COLONY, PUTTENAHALLI, JP NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BENGALURU -560 078 …PETITIONER (BY DR.RANYA SRINIDHI BHARADWAJ, (PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND: 1. S.V. RAGHAVENDRA RAO, NO. 73, VISHNUCHITTAM, 2ND CROSS, 1ST MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, 3RD PHASE, 3RD STAGE BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU - 560085. 2. SUDHINDRA S. RAJA RAO, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, NO. 7, 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, RAGHAVENDRA LAYOUT, AREKERE GATE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560076. 3. S.V. SATHYANARAYANA RAO, NO. 188, 5TH MAIN ROAD, Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 3RD CROSS, 3RD PHASE, JP NAGAR, BENGALURU -560078. ALSO RESIDING IN THE USA. PHONE 1 630 542 1613. 4. S.N. RAMADEVI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT - NO. 27, VYASA NILAYA, 13TH MAIN, JAGRUTHI COLONY, PUTTENAHALLI, JP NAGAR 7TH PHASE, BENGALURU - 560078. PHONE 9448748944 5. S R PRASANNA SIMHA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDENT OF - NO. 498, EAST END MAIN ROAD, 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 069 6. MRUDULA RAGHAVENDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDENT OF - NO. 130, 1ST CROSS, AGS LAYOUT, NEW BEL ROAD, BENGALURU. PHONE NO-9844056738 7. MADHUMATHI KRISHNA KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF 16 103, GODREJ ETERNITY HOLIDAY VILLAGE ROAD, OFF KANAKAPURA ROAD, MALASANDRA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 109 8. MADHAVI SIVANAGERE RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 RESIDENT OF - 606, NAGARJUNA GREENRIDGE APARTMENTS, 19TH MAIN ROAD, 27TH CROSS, NEAR HSR CLUB, HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 102 9. S N JAYASIMHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDENT OF - SY.NO.122/5, KUMBALAGODU AGARA ROAD, TOWARDS KENGERI, OFF KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, AGRA GRAM PANCHAYAT, BENGALURU. P HONE NO - 9480136644 10. S N KUMUDA RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF - BALAJI NEST APARTMENT, 4TH BLOCK, HBR LAYOUT, OFF HENNUR ROAD, BANGALORE PIN CODE 560043 PHONE NO – 9480005614 11. S N VIJAYALAKSHMI, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, RESIDENT OF PUSHKARA, 6TH MAIN, DEVANUR ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, TUMKUR- 572102. PHONE NO 94811 92444 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.D.R.RAJASHEKHARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R8, R10 AND R11 SRI.MANJUNATH M. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4 AND R9 SRI.TIMMANNA BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R13 AND R14) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 QUASHING THE ILLEGAL ORAL DIRECTION AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL ORDER DATED 27.09.2025 PASSED BY THE IV ADDL. PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: 1. Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 27.09.2025 (Annexure-A) passed by the IV Addl. Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural in O.S 1282/2023 in so far as it concerns IA taken under Section 151 CPC (Annexure E). 2.In exercise of powers under Articles 226 and 227 read with Section 340(2) CrPC, in view of the alleged Partition Agreement dated 19.11.2014 (Annexure-C) being produced and relied upon in court by the defendants, this court may be so pleased to direct the filing of a criminal complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate for offences under relevant sections of law arising out of the forged/fabricated document. 3. In the alternative, issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the IV Addl. Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural, to forthwith exercise jurisdiction under Sections 340 & 195 CrPC and file a complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate, as the prima facie case stands established through Annexures-B1,2,3(W/s of defendants), C(Partition Agreement) & E(Certified copy of Application U/Sec 151 CPC originally filed under Sections 340,195 of CrPC read with Sec 151 CPC) - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 4. Direct the Office of the Chief Registrar of Births & Deaths, State of Karnataka; Bhilai Steel Plant, Ministry of Steel, Government of India; and the Central Pension Accounting Office, Ministry of Finance, Government of India (R12, R13 & R14), to produce all records relating to the death of Late Shri S.V. Raja Rao, including death entries and certificates, details of last pension disbursement and proof of life filed; produce signature specimens and service records for forensic comparison with the disputed document (Annexure-C), and direct transmission of the same directly to the jurisdictional Magistrate before whom the complaint is filed. 5. Direct that this Writ Petition be kept pending on the file of this Hon'ble Court for the limited purpose of ensuring compliance with the directions issued under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and further direct that the court before whom the complaint is filed shall submit a brief status/compliance report confirming such compliance, within such time as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit; and that the present Writ Petition shall stand disposed of only upon submission of such compliance reports, so as to secure the ends of justice. 6.Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice.” 2. The petitioner before this Court is the GPA of the party who has appeared before the trial court and also before this Court. It is submitted that there exists no efficacious or alternative remedy against an unrecorded oral order or against a refusal to exercise jurisdiction. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 3. Upon discovering the discrepancy, the petitioner filed an application on 27.09.2025 under Sections 340 and 195(1)(b)(ii) of the CrPC, read with Section 151 of the CPC, seeking a preliminary inquiry into forgery and the filing of a complaint before the magistrate. During the hearing, the learned Civil Judge orally directed the petitioner to strike out the reference to Sections 340 and 195 of the CrPC, stating that they were not maintainable in a civil court, and compelled the application to be treated only under Section 151 of the CPC. This direction was not recorded in the order sheet dated 27.09.2025. Despite the prayer for a preliminary inquiry remaining intact, the court called for objections from the defendants instead of exercising the powers under Section 340 of the CrPC. On 10.11.2025, the petitioner informed the Civil Judge, via a memo of information, of his intention to file a writ petition and requested that no further steps be taken on the wrongly treated application. The learned Judge orally stated that the matter under Section 340 of the CrPC would be considered only after the petitioner's impleadment but refused to record this in the order sheet. It is stated that the - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 petitioner's impleadment application under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC remains pending and was earlier misplaced by the registry, for which certified copies of the same were denied. At that time, this petition was again orally directed to strike off the prayer under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC. It is stated that the certified copies of the written statement and annexures were repeatedly refused by the copying section. All these acts cumulatively demonstrate a refusal to exercise jurisdiction, a violation of natural justice and the abuse of court process, and a violation of the petitioner's fundamental rights. 4. Hence, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Court, and an elaborate prayer has already been set out in the preceding paragraph. When the matter came up for hearing, this Court specifically asked the GPA holder of the petitioner what is order impugned before this Court. He showed an order that has no relevance to the case and said that after he filed an application, the trial court asked him to delete Sections 340 and 195 of the CrPC. 5. Having heard the party-in-person/GPA of the petitioner, perused the material on record. The right of a - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 litigant to appear and prosecute the proceedings in person is a valuable facet of access to justice. The effective conduct of proceedings before the court demands much more than the ability to read, understand, or speak the English language. A litigant appearing in person is expected to possess a basic understanding of procedural law, the limits of judicial jurisdiction, courtroom decorum, and the distinction between judicial orders and oral observations made during the course of the hearing. The Court's experience has shown that in a number of cases, proceedings initiated by parties appearing in person are based on misconceptions of law and procedure, repeated attempts to question oral observations, insistence on release, and the filing of successive proceedings lacking legal foundation. These practices consume substantial judicial time and effect the disposal of cases involving genuine litigants awaiting adjudication. This Court is of the view that the mechanism evolved to facilitate litigants appearing in person should not merely function as a facilitative body but should also ensure that the parties lacking legal foundation are appropriately filtered before being permitted to occupy the time - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 of constitutional courts. Adequate orientation regarding procedural requirements and meaningful scrutiny at the threshold are necessary to serve both the interests of litigants and the administration of justice. 6. In this backdrop, the committee dealing with parties appearing in person shall periodically review its functioning and shall adopt appropriate and effective measures to ensure that only proceedings exposing a prima facie legal cause are permitted to be placed before the court, while simultaneously extending all necessary assistance to genuine litigants seeking access to justice. Considering the kind of allegations that are made against the judicial officer and about the registry of the trial Court, this Court is not inclined to entertain a writ petition of this nature. In the considered opinion of this Court the relief that is sought before this Court can not be granted as there is no factual or legal basis for the same. 7. Accordingly, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010781652025 NC: 2026:KHC:36846 WP No. 36799 of 2025 ii. Pending I.As in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55