- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 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 CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 103586 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. BANAKARA MANJUNATH NAIK S/O. NINGYA NAIK, AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 2. BANAKARA CHANDRA NAIK S/O. LAKY NAIK, AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 3. BANAKARA NINGYA NAIK S/O. LAKY NAIK AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 4. BANAKARA ESHWAR NAIK S/O. LAKY NAIK, AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 5. BANAKARA UMESH NAIK S/O. LAKY NAIK AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 6. BANAKARA DHANYA NAIK S/O. LAKY NAIK AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 7. BANAKARA YANKA NAIK S/O. LAKY NAIK AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 8. BANAKARA RAMESH NAIK S/O. NINGYA NAIK AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 9. SUNIL NAIK @ SUNIL KUMAR NAIK S/O. DHANYA NAIK AGE. 24 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 10. BANAKARA NAGARAJ NAIK S/O. DHANYA NAIK AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 11. BANAKARA JAGADISH NAIK S/O. YANKA NAIK, AGE. 22 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 12. BANAKARA PRAKASH NAIK S/O. YANKA NAIK AGE. 24 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 13. PRAKASH NAIK S/O. DENYA NAIK AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 14. BANAKAR PUTTAVVA W/O. DHANYA NAIK AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 15. HONGALAVVA @ MANJAVVA W/O. GURYA NAIK AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 16. ASHA @ ASHABAYI D/O. NINGYA NAIK AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 17. SMT. SHEELAVVA @ SHEELI BAYI W/O. CHANDRA NAIK AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 18. BANAKAR LAILA @ LAMBANI LAILA W/O. MANJUNATH AGE. 32 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 19. SMT. HEERAVVA @ LAMBANI ERAVVA W/O. UMESH NAIK AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 20. BANAKAR ASHA @ ASHA BAYI D/O. NAGARAJ NAIK AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 21. DYAMAVVA @ LAMBANI DYAMAVVA W/O. LAMBANI YANKA NAIK, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 22. MANGALAVVA @ MANJAVVA W/O. GURYA NAIK AGE. 42 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 23. SMT. MEGLI BAI W/O. HANUMA NAIK, AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 24. SHRI. RAMESH LAMANI S/O. LATE VALYA NAIK AGE. 43 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 25. SMT. LAXMI LAMANI W/O. RAMESH NAIK AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. 26. LAXMI @ LAMBANI REKHA D/O. GURYANAIK AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. GORAVINAGUDDATANDA, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219. &PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVRAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH HIREHADAGALI POLICE STATION, TQ. HADAGALI, DIST. VIJAYANAGARA-583219 THROUGH ITS STATION HOUSE OFFICE, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580008. 2. SHRI. PRASHANT S. NAIK, S/O. SHANKAR NAIK AGE. 35, OCC. LAW PRACTITIONER, NOW R/O. GOVINDA BADAVANE, SREENIVASAPURA, TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI-581115 PERMANENT ADDRESS GORAVINA GUDDI THANDA, HOOVINA HADAGALI, TQ.VIJAYANAGAR. &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. NAVEEN CHATRAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 528 OF BNSS 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HADAGALI IN C.C.NO.1686/2024 ARISING OUT OF CRIME.NO.66/2024 OF HIREHADAGALI POLICE STATION FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 326, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 354, 341, 504 AND 506 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 26 ARE CONCERNED AND ETC.,. 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. Shivraj S. Balloli, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Sri. Naveen Chatrad, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 26 under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the following prayer: <Wherefore, in the light of the above it is most humbly the Hon9ble Court may be pleased to:- a. Quash the impugned proceedings pending on the file of the learned Civil Judge and JMFC, Hadagali in C.C.No.1686/2024 arising out of Crime No.66/2024 of Hirehadagali Police Station for the commission of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 326, 354, 341, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 1860 insofar as the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 26 are concerned. b. Pass any other order(s) as this Hon9ble Court may deems fit on the facts and circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice. = 3. The gist of the charge sheet contents in Column No.17 would go to show that the respondent No.2 having complained to the Hirehadagali Police Station contending that in respect of land in Revenue Survey No.549/2 of Gorvinagudda, there is a civil dispute. In that regard, petitioners herein formed unlawful assembly and assaulted the complainant and his followers resulting in several injuries sustained by the complainant party. Taking note of the injuries sustained by them and for pacification of the quarrel, the accused party would have accomplished the act of murder of the complainant party. The police after thorough investigation, filed the charge sheet. 4. Gravity of the offences is on the higher side. Taking note of the fact that there was a civil dispute - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 between the complainant party and the petitioners, petitioners herein sought for quashing of the charge sheet. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterating the grounds urged in the complaint would contend that in order to gain an upper hand in the pending civil dispute, a false criminal case has been registered, foisted by the respondent No.2, which has been mechanically investigated and charge sheet came to be filed by the Investigating Officer resulting in miscarriage of justice without noticing the pendency of civil dispute and thus, as resulted in abuse of process of law. Hence, sought for allowing of the petition. 6. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State justifies filing of the charge sheet by contending that Investigating Officer has collected sufficient material evidence on record to substantiate the charges levelled against the accused persons as is found in Column No.17 and sought for dismissal of the petition. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/defacto complainant while adopting the arguments put forth by the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State would emphasize that wound certificate would make it clear that grievous injuries are sustained by the complainant party. 8. Therefore, the contention that has been taken on behalf of the petitioners that pendency of the civil dispute is the reason for foisting a false criminal case cannot be countenanced in law, inasmuch as, the injuries as is found in the wound certificate cannot be considered self-inflicted injuries and thus, sought for dismissal of the petition. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record meticulously. 10. On such perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that statements of eyewitnesses have been recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation. Pendency of the civil dispute may be the motive for the incident. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 11. Whether at all, it is the accused party who are aggressive or the complainant party who are aggressive in nature on the day of incident, is to be decided during the trial by recording the oral and documentary evidence on record. 12. In the absence of counter complaint filed by the accused party in respect of the incident and presence of the accused persons and identity of the accused persons having been detailed in the complaint and also taking note of number of injuries sustained by the complainant and moreover, when there are disputed aspects or disputed questions which are propounded by the complainant party and disputed by the accused party, the full fledged trial is necessary. 13. This Court, at the stage of considering the prayer of the petitioner seeking quashing of the charge sheet, cannot hold a mini trial to find out the veracity of the allegations levelled against the accused persons in Column No.17 of the charge sheet. Nor mere pendency of civil - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:370 CRL.P No. 103586 of 2025 dispute would not ipso facto make out a ground to quash pending criminal proceedings in every case. 14. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is dismissed. (ii) All the defences available to the accused party including the defence of pendency of the civil dispute is permitted to be canvassed in the trial in accordance with law. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SMM / Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 69