NAGAPPA GADIGEPPA GANIGER vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 4 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103037 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
BETWEEN:
1. NAGAPPA GADIGEPPA GANIGER,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRL.,
R/O. HOSA TEGUR VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580011.
2. NINGAPPA GADIGEPPA GANIGER,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRL.,
R/O. HOSA TEGUR VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580011.
…PETITIONERSS
(BY SRI LAXMAN T. MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY GARAG POLICE STATION,
TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD,
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011.
2. SMT. GOURIMA ANASARI W/O. BASHADSAB,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRL.,
R/O. HOSA TEGUR VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD-580011.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1)
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S.
528 OF BNSS, 2023), PRAYING TO ALLOW THE CRIMINAL PETITION
AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.3056/2024
ST
PENDING ON THE 1 ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC DHARWAD
ARISING OUT OF FIR IN CRIME NO.129/2023 REGISTERED BY THE
GARAG POLICE STATION, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S.
323, 504 AND 506 R/W. 34 OF IPC AGAINST THE
PETITIONERSS/ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP
for respondent No.1-State are present. Heard Sri.Laxman
T.Mantagani, learned counsel for the petitioners and
Sri.Praveena Y.Devareddiyavara, learned HCGP for the
respondent No.1 – State.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioners/accused
No.3 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the
entire proceedings in C.C.No.3056/2024, pending on the
file of learned I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Dharwad,
arising out of Crime No.129/2023 of Garag Police Station
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
504 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code,
1860.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case in
nutshell are as under:
There is a dispute with regard to the properties
de
between the accused persons and the family of the
facto de facto
complainant. On 14.07.2023, the
complainant came to know that the accused persons were
cultivating the land. Hence, she, along with her son,
namely, Shiraz Basheer Ansari, and son-in-law, namely,
Saddam Hussein Yakkundi, visited the land and asked the
accused persons not to cultivate the same, as it belonged
to them. At that time, the accused persons abused them in
filthy language and claimed that they had purchased the
land. When the complainant obstructed the cultivation and
stood in front of the tractor, accused No.2/petitioner No.2,
namely, Sri.Ningappa, drove the tractor with an intention
to endanger her life. Her son-in-law immediately pulled
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
her away, due to which, she sustained injuries to her right
foot, shoulder and head. Thereafter, the complainant took
treatment at the Government Hospital, Dharwad as an
outpatient. Hence, complainant lodged the complaint to
the respondent – Police, which led to registration of an FIR
and initiation of the investigation. The Investigating Officer
investigated the matter and filed charge-sheet. Taking
exception of the same, the petitioners – accused Nos.1
and 2 have filed this petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners – accused
Nos.1 and 2 vehemently contended that there is a
property dispute between both the parties. It is contended
that the petitioners has been falsely implicated in this case
and there are no materials so as to connect these
petitioners to the case. Further, the charge-sheet material
do not discloses the commission of alleged offences.
Hence, cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
without any substance. Accordingly, the learned counsel
for the petitioners prayed to allow the petition.
5. Learned HCGP vehemently contended that the
charge-sheet materials clearly disclose the commission of
alleged offence and now the matter is set-down for trial.
At this juncture, the petition is not maintainable and once
charge is framed, the petition under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., is not maintainable. Hence, learned HCGP prayed
for rejection of petition.
6. Perused the materials available on record.
7. Though there is a dispute between the
de facto
petitioners and the complainant with regard to the
properties and there is a civil case between both the
parties, the material on record indicate that, on the
relevant date and time, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and
de facto
2 picked up a quarrel with the complainant,
abused them in filthy language and claimed that they had
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
purchased the land. When the complainant obstructed the
cultivation and stood in front of the tractor, accused
No.2/petitioner No.2, namely, Sri.Ningappa, drove the
tractor with an intention to endanger her life. Her son-in-
law immediately pulled her away, due to which, she
sustained injuries to her right foot, shoulder and head.
Further the petitioners/accused persons intentionally
insulted to provoke breach of peace and voluntarily caused
de facto
threat to the complainant. The records reveals
that there is a wound certificate.
8. As per the order sheet maintained by the trial
Court, the trial Court framed charges against the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 and the matter is set
down for trial. This aspect is not disputed by the learned
counsel for the petitioners. Therefore, framing of charges
signifies that the Court, after perusing the charge sheet
material, believes that there is sufficient reason to proceed
with trial. Now the petitioners – accused Nos.1 and 2 are
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18103
CRL.P No. 103037 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020196292026
disputing the question of fact. This Court cannot delve into
disputed question of facts, while exercising jurisdiction
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Moreover, the Trial Court
posted the matter for trial. Hence, there is no merit in this
petition.
dismissed
Accordingly, the petition is hereby .
The trial Court is directed to dispose of the matter as
expeditiously as possible.
Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of, as it do not
survive for any consideration.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
AM/-
CT-AN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75