- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:972 CRL.P No. 100307 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100307 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MAHESH S/O DUNDAPPA ICCHANGI AGE 36 YEARS, OCC. LINEMAN HESCOM R/O. SHIGLI, TALUK LAXMESHWAR -582210 DISTRICT GADAG, DODDURU PANCHAYATH HANDIGNUR, TQ AND DIST. HAVERI. 2. AMARESH S/O SEETARAMAPPA HULUGAR AGE 43 YEARS, OCC. SECTION OFFICER, HESCOM LAXMESHWAR SHIGLI BRANCH R/O. SHIGLI, TALUK LAXMESHWAR -582210 DISTRICT GADAG. 3. GURURAJ S/O VEERANNA CHANNADA AGE 36 YEARS, OCC. AEE HESCOM LAKSHMESHWAR R/O. TAMARAHALLI, TALUK HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI - 583212 DISTRICT VIJAYANAGAR. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BASAVARAJ N. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA , DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD -580011 (THROUGH LAXMESHWAR PS) 2. LAKSHMAN S/O PURAPPA LAMANI AGE 37 YEARS OCC. LABOURER R/AT ULLATTI, TALUK LAKSHMESHWAR -582210 DISTRICT GADAG. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:972 CRL.P No. 100307 of 2025 (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. HANUMESH DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. N.D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO. 01/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, LAKSHMESHWAR (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 70/2023 REGISTERED BY LAKSHMESHWAR P.S.) FOR AN OFFENCE P/U/SE. 336, 338 OF IPC, BY ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION IN SO FOR THESE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri. Basavaraj N. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners; Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1; and Sri.Hanumesh Desai, learned counsel appearing for Sri.N.D.Gunde, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petitioners are employees of HESCOM. An unfortunate incident occurred wherein a child, upon coming into contact with a live electric wire that had fallen near the house of the complainant, sustained injuries. According to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:972 CRL.P No. 100307 of 2025 the complainant, the incident occurred due to the sheer negligence of the petitioners. 3. Based on the complaint, the police registered a case for the offences punishable under Sections 308, 336, and 338 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘the IPC’). After thorough investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 336 and 338 of the IPC. 4. The learned Trial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences and registered the criminal case, and the matter is pending adjudication. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, contended that there was no negligence attributable to the petitioners. 6. It is submitted that at the time of installation of the electric wires, there were only huts in the locality and that the house in question was constructed subsequently and illegally. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:972 CRL.P No. 100307 of 2025 7. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be held liable for the alleged negligence, and sought quashing of the criminal proceedings. 8. Per contra, Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader, and Sri. Hanumesh Desai, learned counsel for respondent No.2, supported the order taking cognizance and prayed for continuation of the criminal proceedings. 9. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides and upon meticulous perusal of the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the grounds urged in the petition are in the nature of defence, which require to be established during trial. 10. Having regard to the limited scope of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’), this Court cannot conduct a mini-trial to determine whether the petitioners were negligent and whether such negligence resulted in the injuries sustained by the child. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:972 CRL.P No. 100307 of 2025 11. Therefore, reserving liberty to the petitioners to canvass all available defences, including the plea regarding illegal construction of the house, the following order is passed: ORDER The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 52