MR DEEPA KUMAR AGARWAL vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
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.6772 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
1. MR. DEEPA KUMAR AGARWAL
S/O JAYAPRAKASH AGARWAL
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
NO.A-203, KASACARD
NILADRI NAGAR, A.R.
WIPRO GATE OPPOSITE
ST
ELECTRONIC CITY, 1 STAGE
BENGALURU CITY-560100.
2. MR. SWAPAN SARIT SAMAL
S/O LAKSHMEDHAR SAMAL
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
NO.113, KANACARD APARTMENT
ND
ANANTH NAGAR, 2 STAGE
ANEKAL TALUK
BANGALORE DISTRICT-560100.
3. MR. SHUBHASHISH SHOMIL
S/O MANOJ KUMAR SINHA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
NO.5072, PRESTIGE APARTMENT
KADUBEESANAHALLI VILLAGE
BENGALURU-560103
4.
MR. RAJKUAMR SAGAR
S/O HASMUKHRAI SAGAR
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
RD
NO.2695, 3 FLOOR
ST
31 MAIN ROAD
HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR 01
BENGALURU-560102.
5. MR. KANISHKA AGARWAL
S/O SHANKAR LAL AGARWAL
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
NO.G-0301, DECORPOT COMPANY
BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA
ELECTRONIC CITY, PHASE-1
BENGALURU-560100.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. K. DIWAKARA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. SANTHOSH U, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HEBBAGODI POLICE STATION
BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT-560099
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU.
2. MR. M.V. VARCHAS
S/O M.V. VASANTHA VALLABHAN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
TH
NO.10, 14 ‘A’ CROSS
VYALIKAVAL
BANGALORE-560003.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUHAS GOWDA M., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. AMITH MANDGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 – [ABSENT])
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH ALL PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.40/2019, CR.NO.415/2018, PENDING BEFORE THE
HONBLE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND JMFC
COURT, ANEKAL, BENGALURU DISTRICT AS AGAINST THESE
PETITIONERS AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for petitioners
and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent
No.1. The learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant is
absent, though represented.
2. The prayer is sought in this petition for quashing
C.C.No.40/2019 arising out of Crime No.415/2018 for the
offence punishable under Sections 506, 504, 143, 149, 323,
324 and 342.
3. The factual matrix of case of the prosecution is that
having received the complaint and investigated the matter, the
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
police filed a charge sheet and specific accusation is made
against the petitioners that C.W.1 was working as Senior
Architectural Design Manager and was having an ill-will against
C.W.1 that he is doing factory project for his own benefit with
an intention to cause loss to the petitioners i.e., accused Nos.1
to 5, who have been shown in the charge sheet. On 29.09.2018
at 6.00 p.m., the complainant-C.W.1 was confined in the
conference room and abused in filthy language. The accused
Nos.1 and 2 assaulted with rippies patty and also iron pipe and
accused Nos.3, 4 and 5 assaulted with their hands and not only
assaulted and even caused life threat. As a result, he had
sustained the injuries.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
vehemently contend referring to Annexure-A, complaint dated
11.10.2018 that according to the complainant, incident has
taken place on 29.09.2018. But, complaint was filed on
11.10.2018 and there was a delay of 12 days in filing the said
complaint. The counsel also would submit that the explanation
given for delay is also not acceptable. The counsel would
vehemently contend that the charge sheet is also not supported
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
with any document for taking any treatment at the first
instance, but only it is stated that went to hospital on
03.10.2018 and even wound certificate given is also pertaining
to belated date. Though certain injuries are mentioned in the
wound certificate and the same cannot be believed and the
same is created for the purpose of this case. Hence, there
cannot be any criminal prosecution against the petitioners
herein. The counsel also would submit that it will not attract
Section 143 IPC and so also with regard to other offences, no
ingredients of the offences are made out. Hence, it requires
interference of this Court. The counsel also would submit that
even while conducting mahazar also, the witnesses, who have
been cited are also outsiders and they are not the factory
employees.
5. Learned High Court Government Pleader for
respondent No.1 would submit that the Court has to take note
of the allegations made in the complaint and specific accusation
is made in the complaint that he was assaulted and he took
treatment and for having taken the treatment at the hospital
also, wound certificate is very clear that injuries are found and
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
even no fractures to invoke Section 324 of IPC. The counsel
also would submit that injured went and took the treatment
and also assigned reasons while lodging the complaint. Hence,
it is not a case for exercising the power under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. The counsel would submit that the grounds which have
been urged regarding delay as well as creation of document
and also other grounds that only with an intention to harass the
petitioners, present complaint is filed and investigation is not
properly conducted cannot be considered at this stage while
exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and also learned High Court Government Pleader for
the respondent No.1, the Court has to take note that incident
has taken place on 29.09.2018. No doubt, the complaint was
given belatedly after 12 days, it has to be noted that, in the
complaint, it is stated that he took treatment at first instance at
Ramakrishna Nursing Home for first-aid and thereafter, he went
to Bowring Hospital on 03.10.2018. Having perused the
complaint, he has stated that his father was not there in the
house. Hence, he could not file complaint and he has given
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
reasons at the time of filing belated complaint and police have
also investigated the matter and recorded the statement of
injured as well as collected the wound certificate for having
taken treatment. No doubt, counsel appearing for the
petitioners would vehemently contend that there was delay of
12 days in lodging the complaint and when the delay is
explained and the victim also went and took the treatment on
the fourth day of the incident at Bowring Hospital and hospital
authorities also noticed injuries, whether it attracts Section 324
IPC or any other offence is a matter of trial. The contention of
learned counsel regarding defence as well as document of
wound certificate is created belatedly is also a matter of trial
and the defences cannot be considered in a petition filed under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the Court has to see whether there
is a prima facie material against the petitioners or not and even
whether it attracts Section 143 of IPC or not also cannot be
considered in a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the
same can be urged before the Trial Court at the time of framing
the charge. Hence, I do not find any grounds to quash the
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60867
CRL.P No. 6772 of 2021
CNR: KAHC010317282021
proceedings in view of the material collected by the
Investigating Officer.
7. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the
following:
ORDER
dismissed.
The criminal petition is
Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE
ST