- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:790 CRL.P No. 100193 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100193 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: SHRI SURESH S/O. BASAVANNEPPA NAVALGI AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. TEACHER, R/O. QUARTERS NO.C-19, K.P.T.C.L. COLONY, NEHRU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VYAS DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH BELAGAVI NORTH TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, BELAGAVI, R/BY IT’S STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENCH AT DHARWAD. 2. MOHAMMED SALMAN PATEL, S/O SALEEM PATEL, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. DOCTOR, R/O. JNMC COLLEGE, BELAGAVI-590001, NOW R/O. FLAT NO.304, 3RD FLOOR, SIMLA HOUSE, 51-B NAPEANSEA ROAD, MALBAR HILL, MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA-400036. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. Z.M.HATTARKI AND SRI A.M.MULLA, ADVOCATES FOR R2) Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:790 CRL.P No. 100193 of 2024 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2023 IN C.C.NO. 429/2016 FOR OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 184, 187 AND 134(B) OF IMV ACT, 1988 AND U/SEC. 338, 279 304(A) OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF JMFC II, BELAGAVI AT BELAGAVI IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER U/SEC. 302 OF CR.P.C. AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri Vyas Desai, learned counsel for petitioner, Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Z.M.Hattarki, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. In the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. following prayer is made. “To quash the order dated 17.10.2023 in C.C.No.429/2016 for offences p/u/sec. 184, 187 and 134(B) of IMV Act, 1988 and u/sec. 338, 279 304(A) of IPC pending on the file of JMFC II, Belagavi at Belagavi in rejecting the application made by the petitioner u/sec. 302 of Cr.P.C. and allow the application in the interest of justice.” 3. Defacto complainant is the petitioner. He is apprehending that the case is being delayed on account of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:790 CRL.P No. 100193 of 2024 fact that the case in C.C.No.429/2016 is not properly conducted as there was an in charge Assistant Public Prosecutor and Court is not serious in disposing of the matter. 4. Therefore, sought for permission to engage a counsel for himself under Section 302 Cr.P.C. so as to conduct the prosecution by a private counsel on behalf of the defacto complainant. 5. On behalf of the petitioner, judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of case Dhariwal Industries Limited vs. Kishore Wadhwani and others reported in (2016) 10 SCC 378 is relied upon especially inviting the attention of this Court to Para 12 of the said judgment wherein it is held as under: “12. In J.K. International [J.K. International v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2001) 3 SCC 462 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 547] , a three-Judge Bench was adverting in detail to Section 302 CrPC. In that context, it has been opined that (SCC pp. 466-67, para 12) the private person who is permitted to conduct prosecution in the Magistrate's Court can engage a counsel to do the needful in the court in his behalf. If a private person is aggrieved by the offence committed against him or against any one in whom he is interested he can approach the Magistrate and seek permission to conduct the prosecution by himself. This Court further proceeded to state that it is open to the court to consider his request and if the court thinks that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:790 CRL.P No. 100193 of 2024 cause of justice would be served better by granting such permission the court would generally grant such permission. Clarifying further, it has been held that the said wider amplitude is limited to the Magistrate's Court, as the right of such private individual to participate in the conduct of prosecution in the Sessions Court is very much restricted and is made subject to the control of the Public Prosecutor.” 6. The application filed by the petitioner and Section 302 Cr.P.C. came to be rejected by the trial Court and that order is assailed in the present petition. 7. Since a regular Assistant Public Prosecutor is now posted to the Court and case is not proceeded on account of the order of stay obtained by the petitioner in this petition, directing the trial Court to dispose of the matter in a time bound manner with further direction for all the concerned to cooperate for the early disposal would meet the ends of justice in the case on hand. 8. Accordingly, following order is passed. ORDER i. Petition stands disposed of. ii. Complainant and all other witnesses are to be secured and trial to be expedited as the case is - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:790 CRL.P No. 100193 of 2024 of the year 2016 that too for the offence punishable under Section 279 and 304A and other alleged offences under the Indian Motor Vehicles Act. iii. The trial Court shall dispose of the case on or before 30.04.2026 positively. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE CLK LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 26