MR P MOHAN vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

ND
DATED THIS THE 2 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026


BEFORE

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

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6926 OF 2020 (482(Cr.PC)

/ 528(BNSS))


BETWEEN:

MR. P. MOHAN
S/O LATE T.PAPAIAH REDDY
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/AT NO.365/3
"SAPTHAGIRI NILAYA"
6TH CROSS, KAGGADASAPURA
C.V.RAMAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560 093.

…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. NISHANTH A V., ADVOCATE)


AND:


1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BYAPPANAHALLI
POLICE BENGALURU
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
BENGALURU-560 001.

2. MR.PRABHAKARAN GURUBATHAM
S/O LATE FRANCIS GURUBATHAM
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 8-A










Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020


GOLFLINK APARTMENTS
CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 052.

…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUHAS GOWDA M., HCGP FOR R1;
R2- SERVED)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO A.QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2018 TAKING
COGNIZANCE AND ISSUING SUMMONS TO PETITIONER
PASSED BY THE X ACMM, MAYO HALL, BANGALORE IN
C.C.NO.59598/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and also learned
HCGP for the respondent-State. Complainant was served
with notice but did not choose to appear before the
Court.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
vehemently contend that specific allegations are made
against this petitioner that he had indulged in creation of
document-GPA and using the same has sold the site/s in
favour of accused Nos.4 to 6. The main contention of the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that specific

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020


accusation in the charge sheet that he had already sold
the site Nos.14 and 15 on 06.03.1985 in favour of one
Sri.Prabhakaran Gurubatham i.e., the complainant and
complainant in turn sold the site No.15 in the year 2003.
But complaint was given on 04.12.2017 stating that he
had executed a power of attorney. But during the course
of investigation the investigating officer has not collected
or seized any GPA allegedly executed by this petitioner in
respect of the very same site No.14.

3. Learned counsel also vehemently contend that when the
suit in O.S.No.4660/2018 was filed subsequently, this
petitioner is arrayed as defendant No.5 and suit in
respect of Site No. 14 is also filed. Since he had retained
Site No.14, learned counsel vehemently contend that the
dispute is of civil nature but criminal colour is given to
the same.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner vehemently contend that
petitioner has not executed any such GPA in respect of
the Site No.14. Once he had sold the property, question
of executing any GPA also doesn't arise. In the absence

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020


of any such GPA, there cannot be any criminal
prosecution.

5. Learned HCGP for the respondent-State would submit
that the specific allegation against this petitioner is that
he had indulged in creation of document and also there
was a trespass and only allegation against this petitioner
is that he had created the document-GPA and fairly
submits that while filing the charge sheet, the
Investigating Officer has not collected any such GPA
executed by this petitioner.

6. In reply to this argument, learned counsel for petitioner
vehemently contend that in the absence of any such
document-GPA allegedly executed by this petitioner,
there cannot be any prosecution against this petitioner
that too criminal prosecution as he has already been
arrayed as defendant No.5 in the aforesaid civil suit.

7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and also learned HCGP, when the petitioner
mainly contend that he had not executed any such GPA

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020


and when the allegation was made that he had indulged
along with other accused in creating a GPA, the
Investigation Officer has not secured any such document
and not mentioned in the charge sheet regarding said
document allegedly executed by this petitioner. In the
absence of any such GPA executed by the petitioner,
there cannot be any criminal prosecution. If the
Investigating officer has collected the said GPA, if it
contains the signature of the petitioner, then there is a
force in the contention of learned HCGP. But learned
HCGP submits that no such GPA is collected during the
course of investigation. In the absence of such
document-GPA allegedly executed by this petitioner,
there cannot be any prosecution.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also brought
to the notice of this Court that in the suit filed by the
very complainant in O.S.No.4660/2018, particularly at
paragraph No.14(c) it is seen that the defendant No.5-
Mr.P.Mohan has sold both the sites through his GPA
holder- Smt.Vijayanthimala to the defendant No.1 and

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020


defendant No.3 respectively, who in turn have sold the
same to the defendant No.4. A copy of the sale deed is
also produced. But no such document-GPA executed by
this petitioner-defendant No.5 is produced in the
aforesaid suit also. When such being the case, when
there is no existence of GPA allegedly executed by this
petitioner, there cannot be any criminal prosecution
against this petitioner. When the suit is already filed,
there is a civil dispute, there cannot be any criminal
colour in respect of a civil dispute between the parties
concerned.

9. Having taken note the suit is filed for the relief of
permanent injunction and in the absence of GPA
allegedly executed by this petitioner, there cannot be
any criminal prosecution against the petitioner and there
is no any prima facie material on record against this
petitioner to face the criminal prosecution and in view of
the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of State of
Haryana and others Vs Bhajan Lal and others
reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 in paragraph

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60779
CRL.P No. 6926 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010191822020


No.102 it is very clear that in the absence of material
there cannot be any criminal prosecution or otherwise it
is nothing but wreak vengeance against the petitioner.
Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the power under Section
482 of Cr.P.C. as on the face value no such material
against the petitioner.
In view of the discussions made above, I pass the
following:
ORDER
(i) Petition is allowed.
(ii) Order dated 11.12.2018 passed in
C.C.No.59598/2018 at Annexure-B taking cognizance
and issuing summons in respect of this petitioner-
accused No.2 is concerned is quashed.

Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE



SBN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12