- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102850 OF 2023 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. VISHWANATH S/O. YALLAPPA HUDED AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. TECHNICIAN, R/O. WADDAR ONI, GANGAVATI, TALUK. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN-583227. 2. MANJUNATH S/O. NARAYANAPPA AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. WADDAR ONI, GANGAVATHI, TALUK. GANGAVATHI, DIST. KOPPAL, PIN-583227. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. PRAKASH BADIGER, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA GANGAVATI TOWN POLICE STATION, GANGAVATI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT, R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, DHARWAD-581011. 2. SMT. SPANDANA W/O. MANJUNATH G. AGE. 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. BEHIND CHANDRAPPA HOSPITAL, NEAR HULIGEMMA TEMPLE, GANGAVATI, TALUK. GANGAVATI, DIST. KOPPAL-583227. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SMT. SOUBHAGYA S. VAKKUND, ADVOCATE FOR R2) CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.13 15:47:36 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C. SEEKING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO. 2105/2023 IN GANGAVATHI P.S. CRIME NO. 203/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GANGAVATI AT GANGAVATI, AGAINST THE PETITIONERS 1 AND 2/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/SEC. 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 R/W SEC. 34 OF IPC, 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) 1. Heard Sri. Prakash Badiger, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1, and Smt.Soubhagya S. Vakkund, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short, ‘the Cr.P.C.’) with the following prayer: “WHEREFORE, the petitioners are most respectfully prays that, this Hon’ble Court may be call for records and quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.2105/2023 in Gangavati P.S. Crime No.203/2022 pending on the file of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 the learned Prl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Gangavati At: Gangavati, against the petitioners 1 and 2/ accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 R/W 34 of the IPC in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. A complaint was lodged by respondent No.2 with Gangavati Police. It was registered as Crime No.203/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 304 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘the IPC’). 4. The gist of the averments in the complaint reveals that the complainant is a handicapped person due to an accidental injury and was previously working at Gangavati Government Hospital. Her relative, namely Vishwanatha, was running a diagnostic laboratory in the name of Vikas Laboratory, situated opposite Gangavati Government Hospital. 5. About two years earlier, near Vikas Laboratory at Pampa Nagar Cross, the sister of the husband of the complainant opened another diagnostic laboratory. Being - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 aggrieved by this, the petitioners herein developed enmity with the husband of the complainant and their family, picked up a quarrel, and allegedly gave a threat to the life of the complainant. 6. About five months prior to the filing of the complaint, the husband of the complainant was transferred from Gangavati. 7. When the matter stood thus, on 05.10.2022 at about 10 a.m., when the complainant was unwell, she visited the Government Hospital, Gangavati, along with her husband. The petitioners herein intercepted the complainant and her husband near Darga, situated in Pheerajad Oni, and abused them in filthy language. They threatened the complainant and her husband, contending that even after the transfer, they had not closed down the laboratory, and warned that if they did not close it, their lives would be taken. 8. During the altercation, the husband of the complainant was pushed and he fell down. The complainant, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 who is handicapped, tried to rescue her husband at that juncture. Both the accused persons not only abused the complainant verbally but also manhandled her and outraged her modesty in public. 9. Based on the said complaint, the police conducted a thorough investigation and filed a charge sheet. 10. The learned trial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences alleged against the petitioners and thereafter issued process. 11. The order taking cognizance and issuing the process is now under challenge in this petition, with the aforesaid prayer. 12. Sri. Prakash Badiger, learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, vehemently contended that a false case has been foisted against the petitioners herein and that no such incident, as alleged in the complaint, has taken place. He accordingly sought quashing of the pending proceedings. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 13. Per contra, Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1, and Smt.Soubhagya Vakkund, learned counsel for respondent No.2, supported the issuance of process. 14. They further contended that there are eyewitnesses to the incident who have stated before the police what transpired near the Darga in Pheerajad Oni, Gangavati, which would be prima facie sufficient to direct the petitioners to stand trial, and accordingly sought dismissal of the petition. 15. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. On such perusal, it is clear that there was enmity regarding the complainant opening a diagnostic laboratory near Pampa nagar Cross, while the petitioner had already opened a diagnostic laboratory situated in front of the Government Hospital, Gangavati. 16. The husband of the complainant was working at Gangavati Government Hospital as a technician. Differences - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 of opinion arose with regard to the second laboratory being opened, which gave rise to the enmity and eventually led to the complaint. Both the petitioner and the husband of the complainant were subsequently transferred from Gangavati. 17. On the unfortunate day, when the husband of the complainant had visited the Government Hospital for treatment, the incident is said to have occurred and was witnessed by independent eyewitnesses. The charge sheet materials reveal the statements of these eyewitnesses. 18. Therefore, the petitioners are required to face trial. If they are innocent of the offences as contended in this petition, an order of acquittal would necessarily follow. 19. Further, if the case filed by the complainant turns out to be wholly false, the petitioners are at liberty to file a case for malicious prosecution. 20. With the above observations, the following order is passed: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1968 CRL.P No. 102850 of 2023 ORDER The petition is dismissed. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE AC CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 34