- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7939 CRL.P No. 7700 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7700 OF 2021 BETWEEN: SRI T.D. NAGARAJ, S/O T.C. DHARMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE BANTWAL RURAL POLICE STATION, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT-574211 PERMANENT RESIDENT OF THUPPUR, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK AND DISTRICT-577201 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S., ADVOCATE) AND: CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, D.K., MANGALURU - 575 001 …RESPONDENT (BY MS. ASMA KAUSAR, ADDL. SPP) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE DATED 11.09.2018 BY THE COURT BELOW AND ALSO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN C.C.NO.4969/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE VI-JMFC, MANGALORE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 174, 176 OF IPC. THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7939 CRL.P No. 7700 of 2021 ORAL ORDER The petitioner being the accused in CC No.4969 of 2018 on the file of the learned JMFC (VI Court), Mangaluru, is seeking to set aside the order dated 11.09.2018 taking cognizance for the offences under Sections 174 and 176 of IPC and summaries the accused by registering the criminal case. 2. Heard Sri Rajashekar S., learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Asma Kouser, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent. Perused the materials on record. 3. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioner has made out any grounds to allow the petition?" My answer to the above point is in the 'Negative' for the following: REASONS 4. The petitioner was serving as Circle Inspector of Police and was the Station House Officer of Bajpe Police - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7939 CRL.P No. 7700 of 2021 Station. SC No.164 of 2016 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, DK, Mangaluru was pending for trial. Since accused No.1 in the said case was not attending the Court, NBW came to be issued on 24.10.2016. In-spite of repeated issuance of NBW, the same was not executed. It is stated that on 10.08.2017 neither NBW was executed nor it was returned to the Court. Therefore, on 11.10.2017 a Show Cause Notice was issued. The petitioner who was the Station House Officer has submitted his representation on 31.10.2017 stating that NBW was entrusted to the Head Constable by name Mr.James, since he was entrusted with other work and was away at Bengaluru, NBW could not be executed nor returned. The said explanation was not accepted by the Trial Court, which made the Chief Administrative Officer to file the private complaint alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 174 and 176 of IPC. 5. The materials on record disclose that NBW was being issued against accused No.1 in SC No.164 of 2016 since 24.10.2016. The same could not be executed till 10.08.2017. As per the order sheet, even the NBW was not returned to the Court as unexecuted. This compelled the Trial Court to issue - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7939 CRL.P No. 7700 of 2021 Show Cause Notice. The explanation given by the petitioner being the Station House Officer was not accepted. Simply because one of the Head Constable was entrusted with the work and was away at Bengaluru for few days, the entire work of Bajpe Police Station cannot be brought to a standstill. When NBW was issued by the Criminal Court, it is the duty of the Station House Officer to see that the NBW is executed and the accused is produced before the Court. If for any reason, NBW could not be executed, the same is to be returned promptly to the Court with necessary endorsement. But the NBW cannot be kept in the Police Station without executing and without returning to the Court. Under such circumstances, Sections 174 and 176 of IPC are invoked. I do not find any reason to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner at this stage as there are prima-facie materials to constitute the offence. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in the main matter, accused is already acquitted. The same cannot be a ground to quash the criminal proceedings. The petitioner can appear before the Trial Court and have his defence, but he is not entitled for any relief in this petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7939 CRL.P No. 7700 of 2021 Hence, the petition is dismissed. It is made clear that, the observations made above is only for disposal of this petition and the same shall not influence the Trial Court in disposal of the matter on merits. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE MKM CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13