- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA WRIT PETITION NO. 100607 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. DASTAGEER S/O. GUDUCHAND JINNEDI AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER-BUS, R/O. #591/1, VAIBHAV NAGAR, 6TH CROSS, KANGRALI BK, BELAGAVI, DIST. BELAGAVI-590010. 2. AKRAM S/O. ALTAF ATTAR AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. LAW PRACTITIONER, R/O. VAIBHAV NAGAR, 2ND SECTOR, KANGRALI BK, DIST. BELAGAVI-590010. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD, THROUGH RURAL PS, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-580020. 2. ANIL S/O. ASHOK PARABAT AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. DRIVER, R/O. CHABBI, TQ. HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD-581207. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1 AND R3; Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 SMT. NAFEESA BANU B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANJANEYA M. ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1950, R/W. SECTION 482 OF THE CR.P.C., 1973/ SECTION 528 OF BNSS 2023, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.3553/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF JMFC II COURT HUBBALLI (HUBBALLI RURAL PS IN CRIME NO. 0129/2024) REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS (ACCUSED NOS. 1 AND 2) FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 279, 304(A) OF IPC AND SECTIONS 134 R/W 187 AND 146 R/W 196 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, AS PER ANNEXURE-B AND D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 INITIATE FRESH OR FURTHER INVESTIGATION WITH RESPECT TO HUBBALLI RURAL PS IN CRIME NO. 0129/2024 UNDER THE MONITORING OF THIS HON9BLE COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO PAY COMPENSATION OF RS. 5,00,000/- EACH TO THE PETITIONERS FOR THEIR FALSE IMPLICATION IN THE CHARGE SHEET FILED IN HUBBALLI RURAL PS IN CRIME NO. 0129/2024, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri Girish A Yadawad, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Smt Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 and 3, and Smt Nafeesa Banu B., learned counsel appearing for Sri Anjaneya M., learned counsel for respondent No. 2. 2. The petition is filed under Section 583 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 8the BNSS9) with the following prayer: <WHEREFORE, it is prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to: A. Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the entire criminal proceedings in CC No. 3553/2024 pending on the file of JMFC II Court Hubballi (Hubballi Rural PS in Crime No. 0129/2024) registered against the petitioners (accused Nos. 1 and 2) for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) of IPC and Sections 134 as per anne=< R/w 187 and 146 R/w 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, as per annexure B and D, in the interest of justice and equity. B. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 3 initiate fresh or further investigation with respect to Hubballi Rural PS in Crime No. 0129/2024 under the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 monitoring of this Hon'ble court, in the interest of justice and equity. C. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 3 to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- each to the petitioners for their false implication in the charge sheet filed in Hubballi Rural PS in Crime No. 0129/2024, in the interest of justice and equity. D. Pass such other order or orders which this Hon'ble court deems necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.= 3. The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 on the ground of suspicion, inasmuch as the eyewitness has only noticed a Red Car which was allegedly involved in the accident resulting in the death of a pedestrian. 4. According to Sri Girish A. Yadawad, learned counsel for the petitioners, the vehicle of the petitioners passed through the toll plaza at about 12:11 a.m. on 25.05.2024. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer registered the complaint at 8:30 a.m. on 25.05.2024, wherein it is clearly mentioned that the incident occurred at about 1:30 a.m. on 25.05.2024. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 5. It is his contention that, in order to suit the filing of the charge sheet, further statements of the complainant and other witnesses were recorded by altering the time of the incident to 12:45 a.m., which, according to him, is per- se impermissible, particularly in view of the documents produced by the accused before the Investigating Officer. On this ground, it is sought that the charge sheet be quashed. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 support the order taking cognizance and the filing of the charge sheet. 7. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court is of the opinion that the grounds urged in the petition are essentially in the nature of defence. 8. Having regard to the limited scope of enquiry at this stage, this Court cannot conduct a mini trial to determine whether the Car of the petitioners passed through the toll plaza at 12:01 a.m. on 25.05.2024 and, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 consequently, whether the said vehicle could not have been involved in the road traffic accident resulting in the death of a pedestrian. Such issues are required to be adjudicated by leading appropriate oral and documentary evidence during trial. 9. Therefore, the filing of the charge sheet and the order taking cognizance cannot be found fault with and are held to be just and proper. 10. This is also not a case where the second prayer of the petitioners seeking further investigation can be granted, inasmuch as the investigation has concluded with a finding that it was the Car of the petitioners which was involved in the accident resulting in the death of a pedestrian due to rash and negligent driving. 11. It is always open to the petitioners to place the necessary material evidence on record, including by summoning the relevant C.C.TV footage of toll plaza recordings, by filing appropriate applications before the Trial Court and to establish his defence. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:378 WP No. 100607 of 2025 12. Ultimately, if the petitioners succeed in establishing that his vehicle was not involved in the incident, he would be entitled to an order of acquittal. 13. In such an event, it would be open to him to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law for malicious prosecution. 14. With the above liberty, the following: ORDER The Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC, CT:CMU LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 97