- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1070 CRL.P No. 8353 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8353 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SRI. NAVEED PASHA @ PASHA AJ NAVEED PASHA S/O EJAJ PASHA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT NO.34/A, 7TH MAIN 2ND CROSS, KENGIRI UPANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 060. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. OMRAN KHAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY HALASUR POLICE BANGALORE - 560 008 (REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR) 2. MRS. UZMA IFRAN, W/O. ZAID SADIQ, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT: NO.1/29, HANUMANTHAPPA LAYOUT ULSOOR, BANGALORE-560008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RANGASWAMY R., HCGP FOR R1 SRI. S. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.64/2022 OF HALASUR P.S., BANGALORE WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE X ACMM, MAYO HALL UNIT, Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1070 CRL.P No. 8353 of 2022 BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 427, 420, 468, 471, 415, 417, 120B OF IPC AND THE CONSEQUENT INVESTIGATION ASS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL ORDER The petitioner being accused No.1 in Crime No.64/2022 of Halasuru Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 427, 420, 468, 471, 415, 417 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code (for short, 'the IPC'), is seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him. 2. Heard Sri.Omran Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Rangaswamy R., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri. S. Mahesh, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the materials on record. 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1070 CRL.P No. 8353 of 2022 "Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him?" My answer to the above point is in the 'negative' for the following: REASONS 4. Respondent No.2 filed the private complaint in PCR.No.51826/2021 before the learned 10th Additional Chief Metropolitan, Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court'), against the petitioner and 10 others, alleging that the petitioner projected himself as an Agreement Holder in respect of a residential site situated adjacent to the house of respondent No.2, projected 3 other persons as the owners of site. Believing the words of accused No.1 and others, respondent No.2 paid Rs.3 Crores and got registered the sale deed, for which, accused No.1 is the consenting witness. It is stated that accused No.1 received Rs.1.2 Crores. Later, the real owner of the residential site appeared and he filed a complaint against accused No.1 as well as against respondent No.2, for cheating him. According to respondent No.2, it is only thereafter he came to know that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1070 CRL.P No. 8353 of 2022 persons who are projected as owners, are not the owners and they have committed the criminal offence by colluding with one another and thereby committed the offences as stated above. 5. Now it is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the dispute is purely of civil nature as respondent No.2 has filed the Civil Suit, which is pending consideration. But according to the learned counsel for respondent No.2, he filed the suit for recovery of the amount that was paid while getting the sale deed executed. Under such circumstances, the allegations made in the private complaint cannot be termed as a civil dispute that can be decided by the Civil Court in the suit that is pending seeking recovery of the amount that was paid by respondent No.2. 6. In view of the above, I do not find any merits in the contention taken by the petitioner that the criminal proceedings is to be quashed as the same is in abuse of process of law. When the serious allegations are made against the petitioner and when there are prima-facie materials to constitute the offences, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1070 CRL.P No. 8353 of 2022 for any relief. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the 'negative' and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The Criminal Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE MKM CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19