- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010049172011 NC: 2026:KHC:53454 WP No. 24128 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA WRIT PETITION No.24128 OF 2011 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI DHANJI BHAI D PATEL AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/A: NO.9, CHANUKYAPURIHUBLI HUBLI - 580021 2. SRI. GOVIND DHANJI PATIL AGED 53 YEARS, R/A NO.9, CHANUKYAPURI, HUBLI -580 021 (PETITIONERS NO.1 AND 2 ARE REPRESENTED BY GPA HOLDER SRI PRAVEEN D PATIL S/O DHINJI PATIL AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.9, CHANUKYAPURI, HUBLI - 21 3. SRI. P. PREMCHAND AGED 58 YEARS, R/A NO.1123, GEETHA ROAD, CHAMARAJPURAM MYSORE-570 004 4. SRI. G. PARASMAL AGED 66 YEARS, R/A NO.18/26, RANGA RAO ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BANGALORE-560 004 Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010049172011 NC: 2026:KHC:53454 WP No. 24128 of 2011 5. SRI. KETAN S. SHAH AGED 51 YEARS, R/A NO.103, KENT GARDEN, 1ST FLOOR, TPJ 3, BORIVALLI-WEST MUMBAI 6. SRI. RAHUL S. SHAH AGED 46 YEARS, R/A NO.602, SPARTA II, PRESTIGE ACROPOLIS, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE 7. SRI. RAJIV S. SHAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/A NO.602, SPARTA II, PRESTIGE ACROPOLIS, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE PETITIONER NOS.6 AND 7 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR G.P.A HOLDER K.S.SHAH 8. SRI GOPILAL LADHA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/A NO.2741, 17TH CROSS, 8TH "B" MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE BANGALORE-560070 9. SRI. VINAY MAHESHWARI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS MAJOR, R/A NO.2741, 17TH CROSS 8TH "B" MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BANGALORE- 560 070 10. SRI. A. RAM CHANDRA REDDY AGED 63 YEARS, S/O LATE ANJAN REDDY R/A NO.41, 1ST FLOOR, MALLESHWARAM, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010049172011 NC: 2026:KHC:53454 WP No. 24128 of 2011 BANGALORE …PETITIONERS (BY SRI SARAVANA.S FOR SRI S.SATHYANARAYANA CHALKE, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, II FLOOR, RASTROTHANA PARISHATH, PARISHATH BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE -560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN 2. THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.3, 1ST CROSS, THIMMAIAH CHAMBERS, III MAIN, GANDHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560009 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER UPPARPET POLICE STATION UPPARPET, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P V CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SMT.WAHEEDA.M.M, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R3; SRI JAGADEESH.G.P FOR SRI PARAS JAIN, ADVOCATES FOR INTERVENORS) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO QUASH THE REGISTRATION OF AN FIR AS PER ANNEXURE-H BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO.226/2011 DATED 16.06.2011 AND ETC., - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010049172011 NC: 2026:KHC:53454 WP No. 24128 of 2011 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri Saravana S, advocate for Sri S.Sathyanarayana Chalke, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2, Smt. Waheeda M.M., learned High Court Government Pleader and Sri Jagadeesh G.P. advocate for Sri Paras Jain, learned counsel for the intervenors. 2. Petition is filed with the following prayer: “Quash the registration of an FIR as per Annexure-H by the 3rd respondent in Crime No.226/2011 dated 16.01.2011.” 3. After hearing the parties and considering the fact that the petitioners herein have deposited the amount before the Executing Court, necessary proof shall be placed before the Investigation Officer. 4. If the particulars filed by the petitioners are satisfactory with regard to the alleged crime, the Investigation Officer is - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010049172011 NC: 2026:KHC:53454 WP No. 24128 of 2011 required to file appropriate report in accordance with law under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. It is settled between the parties that if the civil liability is settled and if lis is privy to the parties, matter can be put at rest. 6. As such, the following: ORDER i. Petition stands dismissed. ii. Petitioners are at liberty to furnish the necessary particulars to the Investigation Officer which shall be duly considered by the Investigation Officer and thereafter suitable report is required to be filed as is contemplated under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. iii. However, if the report filed by the Investigation Officer is detrimental to the interest of any of the parties, they are at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1 CT:VRR