- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:873 CRL.P No. 9140 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9140 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SRI. V. VENKATESH S/O LATE VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.24, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS ROAD, THIMMAIAH GARDEN, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 032. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. LOKESH K., ADVOCATE SRI. K. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE BY R.T. NAGAR POLICE J.C. NAGAR SUB DIVISION, BANGALORE CITY. 2. SMT. HANUMAKKA, W/O LATE S. PUTTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 3. SRI. SRINIVAS, S/O LATE S. PUTTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 4. SRI. ARUN RAJ, W/O LATE S. PUTTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4, ARE RESIDING AT NO.13, 1ST MAIN, THIMMAIAH GARDEN, Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:873 CRL.P No. 9140 of 2022 R.T. NAGAR, BANGALORE-560032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SOWMYA .R., HCGP FOR R1 SRI. KARTHIKEYAN .N., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2-4) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING IN P.C.R.NO.9061/2020 (CR.NO.256/2020) IN C.C.NO.24285/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE 32ND ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT BENGALURU UNDER SEC.465, 468, 471, 474, 417, 120(B) AND 201 OF IPC. 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 Petitioner being accused No.1 in Cr.No.256/2020 of R.T.Nagar police Station (PCR No.9061/2020) in CC No.24285/2022 pending on the file of the 8th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru (earlier pending on the file of the learned 32nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru), registered for the offences punishable under Sections 466, 420, 465, 468, 417, 471, 474, 120B, 201 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC') is seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against him. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:873 CRL.P No. 9140 of 2022 2. Heard Sri. Lokesh K, learned counsel for Sri. K.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sowmya R, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 and Sri. Karthikeyan N, learned counsel for Sri. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4. 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: "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 'Affirmative' for the following: REASONS 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the memo producing the certified copy of the compromise petition filed in OS.No.3239/2025 under Order XXIII Rule 3 R/w Section 151 of CPC, and contended that respondent No.2 had filed a suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 26.06.2019, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:873 CRL.P No. 9140 of 2022 General Power of Attorney deed dated 27.11.1995 and the affidavit dated 10.07.2007 are null and void against the petitioner herein. 5. It is stated that during the pendency of the suit OS. No.3239/2025, parties have entered into a compromise and the suit came to be decreed in terms of compromise petition, declaring that the sale deed, General Power of Attorney deed and the affidavit referred to above are null and void. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for allowing the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings. 6. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 representing the complainants admits the contention taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits no objection for allowing the petition. 7. It is noticed that a private complaint is filed by the private respondents against the petitioner and another, alleging commission of the offence as stated above, regarding forging and fabricating the General Power of Attorney deed dated 27.11.1995 and the affidavit dated 10.07.2007 and on the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:873 CRL.P No. 9140 of 2022 basis of such forged document executing the sale deed in favour of accused No.1 on 26.06.2019. Pursuant to the suit for declaration filed by respondent No.2, a compromise was entered into between the parties and the suit came to be decreed. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 have no objection to allow the petition. 8. The petitioner/accused No.1, respondent Nos.2 to 4 are present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 have no objection to allow the petition. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that continuation of the criminal proceedings before the Trial Court will not yield any result. Hence, the same is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The Criminal Petition is allowed. (ii) The criminal proceedings initiated in Cr.No.256/2020 of R.T.Nagar police Station (PCR No.9061/2020) in CC No.24285/2022 pending on the file of the 8th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:873 CRL.P No. 9140 of 2022 Bengaluru (earlier pending on the file of the learned 32nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru), registered for the offences punishable under Sections 466, 420, 465, 468, 417, 471, 474, 120B, 201 of IPC, is hereby quashed against the petitioner herein. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending IA No.1/2022 stands disposed off. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE BH CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34