- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:334 CRL.P No. 101008 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101008 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. KONKANI RAMAPPA S/O KONANKI NETTAPPA AGE. ADULT, OCC. R/O H NO.31, WEST AIRPORT ROAD, 5TH CROSS, VIDYA BALLARI 583101. 2. HAMPANNA GOUDA B. S/O RANGANA GOWDA B. AGE. ADULT, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O H NO 24, W.NO.5, BANGALORE RD, SUJI GALLI, NEAR GANESH BALLARI 583101. 3. KRISHNA PRADEEP KUMAR N. S/O. N. PULLAIAH AGE. ADULT, OCC. R/O YARANGALIGI ROAD, KRISHNA NAGAR CAMP, BALLARI 583101. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. M.L. VANTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY PSI BRUCEPET POLICE STATION, RPTD BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD-581001. 2. RAJESH J., AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESSMAN, R/O H.NO.3, GURUPRASAD BEHIND KED QUATTERS 1ST CROSS, SATYANARAYANA PET, BALLARI 583101. &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. H.R. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2) Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:334 CRL.P No. 101008 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT AND FIR REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 3 IN BRUCEPET POLICE STATION CRIME NO. 63/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC. U/SEC. 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC, 1860 PENDING ON THE FILE OF I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND J.M.F.C. COURT, BALLARI. THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard Sri.M.L.Vanti, learned counsel appearing for petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader-Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil, appearing for respondent No.1-State and learned counsel Sri.H.R.Deshpande, appearing for respondent No.2. 2. Beneficiary of the sale deed dated 29.04.2024 is the petitioner, who has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 8the Cr.P.C.9 for short), with the following prayer: <Wherefore, the petitioners most respectfully pray that the Hon'ble court be pleased to quash the Complaint and FIR registered against the petitioners/accused No.1 to 3 in Brucepet Police the Station Crime No.63/2024 for offence punishable under Section U/s. 419, 420, 465, 468, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:334 CRL.P No. 101008 of 2024 471 R/w Section 34 of IPC, 1860 pending on the file of 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn) and in the interest of J.M.F.C Court, Bellary, justice. Grant such other relief's as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.= 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under: Second respondent filed a complaint with Brucepet Police Station, Ballari, for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 465, 468, 471 read with Section 34 IPC, which was registered in Crime No.63 of 2024 by the Brucepet Police Station on 13.03.2024. In the complaint, it is alleged that on 29.01.2024 in the Sub-Registrar Office, a sale deed came to be registered wherein the vendors were impersonated and land belonging to the complainant and his uncles became the subject matter of the sale. In that regard, civil suit proceedings have also been filed. 4. Based on the complaint averments, the police registered and are investigating the matter. 5. Counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, vehemently contented that the second respondent has cleverly not complained against his uncles about - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:334 CRL.P No. 101008 of 2024 the impersonation and has filed the petition against the petitioners alone, which has resulted in miscarriage of justice, as there is no criminality involved in respect of the sale transaction. As a blackmailing and arm-twisting method, the present complaint has been filed against the petitioners with ulterior motive and sought for quashing of the pending FIR. 6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader-Smt.Kirtilata R. Patil, appearing for respondent No.1-State and Sri.H.R.Deshpande, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, support the registration of the crime and contend that the investigation agency would investigate the matter and thereafter file the final report in accordance with law and therefore, the question of quashing the FIR would not arise. 7. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. 8. On such perusal of the material on record, it is crystal clear that, in respect of the sale transaction, a complaint came to be filed and there is already a civil suit. 9. All that the petitioners are required to do is to furnish the necessary documents before the Investigation Officer and place prima facie proof facts that sale deed is valid. The - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:334 CRL.P No. 101008 of 2024 Investigation Officer is at liberty to investigate the matter, including recording the statements of the Uncles of respondent No.2 and if no offence is made out, he would file an appropriate report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. 10. It is too premature for this Court to form an opinion about the grounds urged in the petition by holding a mini trial, that too when the investigation is still in the inception stage. It is settled principles of law and requires no emphasis that the Courts are to be extremely slow while accepting the prayer for quashing the FIR, unless it is made out that very registration of the FIR itself is an abuse of the course of law. 11. No such grounds are forthcoming in the case on hand. Merely on the ground that the petitioners have obtained an order of injunction from the duly constituted Civil Court would not be sufficient enough to say that the complaint averments are totally false. 12. Anyway, based on the original sale deed, it is for the Investigating Agency to find out whether the impersonation has taken place or not. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:334 CRL.P No. 101008 of 2024 13. Reserving liberty for the petitioner, in the event of filing of the charge sheet, to challenge the validity of the same, the following order: ORDER The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE RHR/- CT:CMU LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 7