L J MALATHI vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4363 OF 2020 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS))

BETWEEN:


L. J. MALATHI
D/O JANARDHANA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
C/O MANJUNATH,
NO.327, 11TH CROSS,
AGRAHARA LAYOUT,
YELAHANKA,
BANGALORE - 560 064.
…PETITIONER








(BY SMT. L. J. MALATHI, ADVOCATE (PARTY-IN-PERSON)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH BAGALUR POLICE,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BANGALORE - 560 001.

Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA


2. PADMA
W/O NARASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT NO.146, BAGALUR VILLAGE,
BANGALORE NORTH - 562 149.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP FOR R1

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

RS SERVED)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE PARTY-IN-
PERSON PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN
CRL.RP.NO.15031/2015 ORDER DATED 21.09.2019 V
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE BENGALURU RURAL
DEVANAHALLI AND SET ASIDE ORDER DATED 18.09.2015 IN
C.C.NO.3146/2013, ANNEXURE-B PASSED BY THE PRL.JUDGE
AND JMFC, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 341,343,427,506,504 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed praying this court to set aside the
order dated 18.09.2015 passed in C.C.No.3146/2013 as
per Annexure B, also the order dated 21.09.2019 passed
by the V Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Devanahalli,
Bengaluru Rural District, confirming the order of the trial
Court and rejecting the application filed under Section 239
of Cr.P.C.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

2. The factual matrix of case of complainant before
the trial court is that on 12.06.2013 at 10:30 a.m., when
the complainant was pursuing the Work of her house and
while going in front of her house towards the upstairs to
attend the RCC work, this accused wrongfully restrained
her, abused her in a filthy language and slapped her on
the cheek and caused life threat and picked up a stone,
which was lying at the spot and thrown the same on the
window, which has resulted breaking of the said window
and causing of loss to the extent of amount of Rs.800/-,
and hence complaint is filed. The police have received the
complaint and investigated the matter and filed charge
sheet.

3. The petitioner/party-in-person, filed an application
before the trial Court for discharge, on the ground that the
very mahazar which was prepared at the spot is created
and no such incident had taken place and police have also
acted in favour of the complainant in registering the case
and investigating the matter and filing the charge sheet.

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

The very registration of the case is illegal and there is no
clarity about the time of the incident and lodging of the
complaint. Further contended that the window glass
broken due to the heat and witnesses examined are also
witnesses on behalf of the complainant. Hence, there
cannot be any prosecution.

4. The said application was opposed by the Assistant
Public Prosecutor by filing a detailed statement of
objections, contending that the incident was witnessed by
eyewitnesses and also mahazar was done to the effect
that this petitioner had broken the window and it is a
matter of trial. The trial Court also taken note in rejecting
the application that the Court cannot conduct a mini trial
at the time of discharge, only to look into the material
placed along with the charge sheet. Investigating Officer
also recorded the further statement of the complainant
and Investigating Officer while filing the charge sheet also
produced the photograph of the window and mahazar was
also drawn and also taken note of the copy of the orders

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

passed by the High Court in Crl.P.No.4955/2014 dated
09.10.2014 and also the entire charge sheet material and
contempt petition in CCC No.1106/2013, copy of the
orders passed in CC No.3785/2013 and the entire material
charge sheet. On perusal of the documents, it goes to
show that, admittedly there is one more case filed by the
accused against the complainant of this case, against her
husband and also the children. Also perused the copy of
the order sheet in PCR No.195/2011, which has been
numbered as CC No.51188/2013, the Court comes to the
conclusion that Court has to see the material available on
record, at the time of considering the application and
rejected the same. The said order has been challenged
before the District Court and District Court also confirmed
the same, while confirming the same comes to the
conclusion that when the Investigating Officer has
recorded the statement of complainant and neighbours
and drawn the mahazar at the spot when all these
materials prima facie discloses, with regard to the

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

proceedings against the petitioner and while considering
the application under Section 239 of Cr.P.C, the Court
cannot conduct any mini trial and it requires full fledged
trial and the same is found in paragraph No.10 of the
Judgment of the Appellate Court.

5. Now the petitioner who is party-in-person would
vehemently contend that it is a false case registered
against the petitioner and no such incident was taken
place and police also acted in favour of the complainant
and the very mahazar is also created one, there cannot be
any prosecution. The counsel appearing for the State
would submit that the trial court taken note of the
mahazar and also the eyewitnesses statement who are the
neighbours, who have witnessed the incident and made
their statement before the IO and also along with charge
sheet was filed. The Photograph also produced evidencing
the fact that window was damaged and so also submits
that there was an agreement of tenancy between the
complainant and the accused that and this petitioner being

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

the tenant committed the offence and hence it is a matter
of trial.

6. Having heard the petitioner/party-in-person and
also the counsel appearing for the State, when
complainant/respondent though served and unrepresented
and court has to take note of the order passed by the trial
court, as well as the revisional court. Apart from that, the
charge sheet allegations also. The complainant is cited as
PW1 and eyewitnesses also cited as CW2 and CW3 and so
also the witnesses from CW4 to CW7 were examined and
the statement was also recorded. The witnesses speaks
about the incident and witnessing the same and drawing
up the mahazar. The mahazar witnesses also been cited
regarding the allegations that the petitioner caused the
window to be broken and photograph also produced along
with the charge sheet. When such materials are available
before the court, it is a case of trial and both the trial court
and also the revisional court have gone through the
materials available on record, particularly statement of

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57183
CRL.P No. 4363 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010558182019

eyewitnesses, as well as mahazar witnesses and also
records discloses that this petitioner was a tenant of the
complainant and incident had taken place on particular
date at i.e., 12.06.2013 at 09:45 a.m., and complaint was
also lodged immediately without any delay. When such
being the case, it is a matter of trial, and hence I do not
find any grounds to set aside the order of the trial court,
as well as the revisional Court. Hence no ground is made
out by the petitioner/party-in-person. In view of the
discussions made up, I proceed to pass the following
order.

dismissed
This petition is .

Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE
AKV_List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27