ABHAYSINGH SARDESAI vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD



TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE


THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.102613 OF 2025

[482(Cr.P.C)/528(BNSS)]

BETWEEN:




ABHAYSINGH SARDESAI

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,

OCCUPATION: PVT. SERVICE,

RESIDING OF: DOOR NO.73/4,

SHRAVANTI PRISTINE,

TIMAPPA REDDY LAYOUT,

BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU.

…PETITIONER
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
(BY SRI OMKAR LAXMAN DESAI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY H.C.G.P., HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD,
THROUGH TILAKAWADI POLICE STATION,
BELAGAVI.

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025



2. DHANASHRI K. SARDESAI JAMBOTIKAR
W/O. KARANSINGH SARDESAI JAMBOTIKAR,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
RESIDING OF: 284, AGARKAR ROAD,
TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI - 590 006.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)


THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528
OF THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023,
PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIMINAL CASE
NO.127 OF 2020 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTIONS 341, 352, 504 AND 506 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE
FILE OF THE IV JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS,
BELAGAVI, AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 ARISING
OUT OF CRIME NO.77 OF 2019 OF TILAKWADI POLICE
STATION, BELAGAVI AND ETC.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FURTHER
ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025


ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
HCGP for respondent-State.
The petitioner-accused No.2 has filed this petition under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
seeking to quash the proceedings in Criminal Case No.127 of
2020 pending on the file of the IV Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Belagavi, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 341, 352, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on
de facto
31.10.2019 at about 4:00 p.m., when the complainant
was in her house, the petitioner and others trespassed into her
house, picked up quarrel, abused her in filthy language,
voluntarily caused hurt and criminally intimidated her with dire
consequences. Hence, she lodged a complaint, which led to the
registration of the case and investigation. After investigation,
the Investigating Officer has filed the charge-sheet, and the
matter was set down for trial.

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025


3. Taking exception to filing of the charge-sheet, the
petitioner has filed this petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently
contended that, after lodging the complaint, the complainant
did not appear before the trial Court to give evidence. Civil suit
for partition is pending between the father-in-law and the
husband of the complainant and that the present complaint was
lodged to overcome the said dispute. He further contended that
accused No.1 was thrown out of his own house by the
complainant and her husband and that he had approached the
competent Court seeking appropriate relief. He further
contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
case and that there are no substantial material connecting the
petitioner to the alleged offences. The charge-sheet material
does not disclose the commission of the alleged offences, and
therefore, the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is
unsustainable. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner
prayed to allow the petition.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025


Per contra
5. , the learned High Court Government Pleader
for the respondent-State has contended that the charge-sheet
material clearly discloses the commission of the alleged
offences and that the veracity of the allegations against the
accused can be considered only after a full-fledged trial. It is
further contended that the petition was filed at the stage when
the trial Court had taken cognizance of the offences, whereas
the trial Court has now framed charges against the accused and
the matter is set down for trial. At this stage, interference with
the proceedings is unwarranted. Hence, learned HCGP prayed
for dismissal of the petition.

6. Perused the entire charge-sheet material. As per the
charge-sheet, the petitioner and others allegedly trespassed
de facto
into the house of the complainant, quarreled with her,
abused her in filthy language, intentionally insulted her with the
intention of provoking a breach of peace, caused hurt and
criminally intimidated her with dire consequences. The order-
sheet maintained by the trial Court discloses that charges have
been framed against the accused and the matter is set down
for trial. This aspect has not been disputed by the learned

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025


counsel for the petitioner. The framing of charges indicates that
the trial Court, upon consideration of the charge-sheet
material, found sufficient grounds to proceed with the trial. The
contention that the complainant has not appeared before the
trial Court to tender her evidence is a matter to be dealt by the
trial Court, which may take appropriate steps to secure her
presence in accordance with law. The alleged pendency of a
civil dispute between the parties, by itself, is not a ground to
quash the criminal proceedings. Further, no material has been
placed on record to substantiate the contention regarding the
pendency of the alleged civil suit. The Hon'ble Apex Court has,
in several judgments, held that once charges have been framed
and the matter is set down for trial, the High Court should
ordinarily be reluctant to interfere with the proceedings under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
unless exceptional circumstances warrant such interference. In
the present case, the petitioner-accused No.2 has not made out
any exceptional circumstances warranting quashing of the
proceedings. Further, the petitioner seeks to raise disputed
questions of fact, which cannot be examined by this Court while

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17095
CRL.P No. 102613 of 2025


CNR: KAHC020097472025


exercising its jurisdiction under Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

7. In view of the foregoing discussion, I find no merit in
dismissed
the petition. Accordingly, the petition is .

In view of the dismissal of the petition, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand dismissed.

Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE




KVK /CT-SK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6