Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 46896 (KAR)

SRI JOSHI ABRAHAM v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

CRL.P/2291/2023 · 2026-01-13

M Nagaprasanna

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1979 CRL.P No. 2291 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2291 OF 2023 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. JOSHI ABRAHAM, S/O AVEERA ABRAHAM, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT QUARTERS NO. 175, TYPE III, AYUR VIGYAN NAGAR, DELHI 3 110 092. 2. SRI. BENNY ABRAHAM, S/O AVEERA ABRAHAM, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT KORIYAR HOUSE, MARDALA VILLAGE AND POST, KADABA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT 3 574 230. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SACHIN B. S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, KADABA P.S, KADABA, REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU 3 560 001. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1979 CRL.P No. 2291 of 2023 2. ANI MATHEW, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O A.P.CHERIAN, R/AT ANIKETHAN FARM, KERMAI HOUSE, MARDALA, 102 NEKKILADI VILLAGE, KADABA TALUK, DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT 3 574 230. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI. MOHAN CHANDRA P., ADVOCATER FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN PCR NO. 207/2022 ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC PUTTUR D.K., INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 323, 354, 447, 504, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AS PER DOCUMENT NO. 1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri.Sachin B.S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.N.Jagadeesha, learned Addl. SPP appearing for respondent No.1, Sri.Mohan Chandra P, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and have perused the material on record. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1979 CRL.P No. 2291 of 2023 2. Petitioners are before this Court calling in question the registration of a private complaint in P.C.R.No.207/2022. The petitioners does not challenge the registration of a crime after the reference. However, learned Addl. SPP appearing for the respondent-State would submit that a 'B' report has been filed in Crime No.75/2022. It transpires that the complainant had registered a crime in Crime No.140/2018 on a solitary incident that takes place on 5.7.2018. The police after investigation had filed a 'B' report. The 'B' report had been accepted by the concerned Court without hearing the complainant. The complainant challenges the said order before this Court. The Coordinate Bench of this Court sets the acceptance of the 'B' report aside and remits the matter back to the hands of the concerned Court to consider the matter afresh. 3. Learned Additional SPP submits yet again 'B' report is filed in the matter that is now remitted back to the hands of the Court. Therefore, there are two 'B' reports now filed. One in Crime No.75/2022 and the other in Crime No.140/2018. It needs to be noticed that the complainant has prima facie - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1979 CRL.P No. 2291 of 2023 misused the criminal justice system by filing repeated complaints on the same cause of action as Crime No.140/2018 sprang on an incident that occurs on 5.7.2018. Four years later, a crime in Crime No.75/2022 springs on the same incident i.e., 5.7.2018. Therefore, it becomes necessary to observe while disposing this petition that in the event complainant again seeks to register the complaint on the same incident of 5.7.2018, it is open for the petitioners to initiate proceedings for malicious prosecution against the complainant. 4. Learned counsel Sri.Mohan Chandra P, submits that while the 'B' report was accepted in Crime No.140/2018, the petitioners had instituted proceedings for malicious prosecution while the Coordinate Bench of this Court had set it aside and sent it back. In that light, it is un-understandable as to how malicious prosecution could spring when this Court entertained the petition and the matter had been remitted back to the concerned Court for a fresh consideration. Therefore, liberty is reserved to the petitioners only if another crime comes to be registered on the same cause of action i.e., incident dated 5.7.2018. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1979 CRL.P No. 2291 of 2023 5. With the aforesaid observation, reserving liberty to the petitioners to knock at the doors of the appropriate Fora in the event of need, the Criminal Petition stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5 CT:SS