- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2201 CRL.P No. 101031 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101031 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: 1. MARUR MALLAPPA S/O LATE MARURU LINGANNA AGE. 70 YEARS, HOUSE NO.224 WARD NO.2 NEAR BAJJAPPATATA TEMPLE, VANENURU (V) BALLARI (TQ) BALLARI-583117. 2. NINGAMMA K. W/O K. MARUR MALLAPPA AGE. 62 YEARS, HOUSE NO.224, NEAR BAJJAPPATATA TEMPLE, VANENURU (V), BALLARI (TQ) BALLARI-583117. 3. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O MARURU MALLAPPA AGE. 40 YEARS, C/O K.M. MALLAPPA NEAR BAJJAPPATATA TEMPLE, VANENURU (V), BALLARI (TQ) BALLARI-583117. 4. RANGAPPA S/O NAGAPPA AGE. 37 YEARS, VANENURU (V), BALLARI (TQ) BALLARI-583117. 5. HANUMANTHA S/O ERANNA AGE. 36 YEARS, CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Date: 2026.02.17 16:59:15 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2201 CRL.P No. 101031 of 2024 NEAR BAJJAPPATATA TEMPLE, VANENURU (V), BALLARI (TQ) BALLARI-583117. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. THEJAS W.K. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SUNIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY MOKA P.S. BALLARI REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING COMPLEX DHARWAD-580011. 2. K. DODDABASAPPA S/O LATE K. SANNA THIPPANNA AGE. 47 YEARS, NEAR BAJJAPPATATA TEMPLE, VANENURU (V), BALLARI (TQ) BALLARI-583117. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL , HCGP FOR R1; SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF REJECTION OF B FINAL REPORT DATED 14.02.2024 PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.150/2022 OF MOKA P.S. FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 149, 208, 209, 210, 290, 323, 324, 420, 426, 447, 448, 504, 506, R/W 34 OF IPC WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 4 TH ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, BALLARI, IN SO FAR PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 5 CONCERNED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2201 CRL.P No. 101031 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) 1. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Thejas W. K. appearing on behalf of Sri. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State and Sri. Manjunath G. Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. The present petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with the following prayer: “WHEREFORE, the Petitioners most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to A) Quash the order of rejection of “B” Final Report dated 14/02/2024 proceedings in Crime No.150/2022 of Moka P.S. for offences p/u/s 149, 208, 209, 210, 290, 323, 324, 420, 426, 447, 448, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of IPC which is now pending on the file of the 4th Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Ballari; in so far petitioners/accused No.1 to 5 concerned. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2201 CRL.P No. 101031 of 2024 B) Pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the ends of justice.” 3. The facts which are utmost necessary are as under: 4. A complaint came to be lodged with Moka P.S., P.D. Halli Circle, Ballari District, on 17.12.2022, which was registered in Crime No.150/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 149, 208, 209, 210, 290, 323, 324, 420, 426, 447, 448, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 5. Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that in respect of the land bearing Survey No.153 D/1 measuring 3 acres 37 guntas situated in Vanenuru village, there were documents which were concocted, and in that regard, a suit in OS No.210/2014 was filed. 6. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 22.03.2019 passed in the said suit, the matter was taken up to the First Appellate Court in RA No.72/2019. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:2201 CRL.P No. 101031 of 2024 7. During the pendency of the civil disputes, the complainant sought to initiate action against the accused. 8. Police after thorough investigation filed a “B” Final Report. 9. Learned Trial Magistrate after considering the “B” Final Report and entertaining the protest petition, accepted the “B” Final Report and dismissed the complaint. 10. Against such an order, a Revision Petition is maintainable under law. 11. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to the petitioner to file a Criminal Revision Petition in accordance with law. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SMM / LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 38