JAYARAM H K vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024





IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 683 OF 2024

BETWEEN:

1. JAYARAM H.K.
S/O LATE KALAPPA,
AGED 57 YEARS,





2. ROOPAVATHI
W/O JAYARAM H.K.
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT sy.no.41/1,
HEGGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE
SARJAPUR HOBLI,
ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DIST.
…PETITIONERS







Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. BHUJABALAIAH Y.C., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SARJAPURA POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE-URBAN DISTRICT
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS
BANGALORE.

2.
SMT. KATTAM REDDY SRIDEVI
W/O SRINIVASA REDDY

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024



AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/O VILLA NO.23, CAUVERY LAYOUT,
KUDULU VILLAGE, ANEKAL TALUK,
BANGALORE - 560 084.
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.JAVEED S., HCGP FOR R-1;
SRI.E.VENKATARAMI REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED IN CR.NO.207/2023 REGISTERED
BY SARJAPURA POLICE STATION, PRODUCED HEREIN AT
ANNEXURE-A DATED 08.07.2023, FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCES P/U/S 379, 420, 447, 468, 471, 504, 506 R/W SEC.
34 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE
(JR.DN.) AND J.M.F.C., ANEKAL, BENGALURU RURAL,
BENGALURU AT ANNEXURE-D, LODGED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash
the FIR against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime
No.207/2023 dated 08.07.2023 registered by Sarjapura Police
Station against the petitioners for the offences punishable
under Sections 471, 468, 447, 420, 379, 504, 506 r/w 34 of

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024



IPC, on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Court,
Anekal, Bengaluru Rural Dist.

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2,
Smt.Katam Reddy Sridevi, lodged a complaint before
respondent No.1-Police on 08.07.2023, alleging that her
mother-in-law had purchased the property bearing Sy.No.41/1,
measuring 2 acres and 16 guntas, on 02.08.2004 and had been
in possession of the same since then. Subsequently, the said
property was gifted to the husband of respondent No.2, who
executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of respondent
No.2 on 13.10.2022. Accordingly, respondent No.2 claims to
have been put in possession of the said property.

3. When things stood thus, petitioner No.1, Sri.Jayaram
H.K., and his wife allegedly forged certain documents
pertaining to the said property and initiated proceedings before
the Assistant Commissioner in R.A(A).No.549/2018-19.
Thereafter, revision proceedings were also initiated in
R.P.No.405/2022. Subsequently, respondent No.2 instituted a

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024



suit against the petitioners in O.S.No.1280/2022, which is
pending for adjudication.

4. While matters stood thus, on 05.07.2023, petitioner No.1
lodged a complaint against respondent No.2 before the
Sarjapura Police Station, which was registered in NCR
No.306/2023. On the basis of the said complaint, the Police
advised both parties not to indulge in any unlawful acts in
relation to the property. Despite the same, on 06.07.2023, the
petitioners allegedly trespassed into the property in the
possession of respondent No.2 and illegally removed a
container kept therein, valued at Rs.2,00,000/-. Accordingly,
respondent No.2 lodged a complaint before respondent No.1-
Police. On the basis of the said complaint, the respondent No.1-
Police registered an FIR against the petitioners for the
aforementioned offences. Being aggrieved by the registration of
the FIR, the petitioners have preferred the present petition.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024



6. Learned counsel for the petitioners primarily contended
that the complaint lodged by respondent No.2, is registered out
of vengence against the petitioners as they on 05.07.2023 filed
a complaint before the Sarjapura Police Station against
respondent No.2 which was registered in NCR stated supra and
in order to give criminal colour to the civil dispute. Accordingly,
he prays to allow the petition.

7. The learned HCGP opposed the prayer on the ground that
the investigation is still at a nascent stage and the Police are
required to collect relevant materials, particularly in view of the
allegation that the petitioners had removed the container from
the property. Hence, he prays to dismissal the petition.

8. I have given my anxious consideration both on the
submissions and perused the complaint averments.

9. As could be gathered from the complaint averments,
admittedly, there is a civil dispute between the parties in
O.S.No.1280/2022, instituted by respondent No.2 against the
petitioners. Moreover, both parties are claiming rights over the
property in which the alleged incident is stated to have

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024



occurred. It is also relevant to note that petitioner No.1 had
lodged a complaint against respondent No.2 on 05.07.2023,
i.e., one day prior to the alleged incident, which was registered
in NCR No.306/2023. In such circumstances, the complaint
lodged by respondent No.2 on the following day appears to be
retaliatory in nature. Apart from the pending civil suit, other
proceedings are also pending before the Tahsildar and the
Assistant Commissioner. Further, the Police have not seized the
alleged container for a period of more than six months, i.e.,
from 08.07.2023 to 16.01.2024. Under these circumstances,
this Court is of the considered view that respondent No.2
appears to have lodged the complaint to give a criminal colour
to the existing civil dispute. In such circumstances, the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of BIKKU BHAI GOVINDA BHAI VS.
STATE OF GUJARAT in SLP (Crl) No.15537/2023 dated
22.05.2026, held in paragraph Nos.52 to 54 as under:
"52. The present case, viewed in its peculiar facts
and circumstances, constitutes all the characteristics of
a civil property dispute, which is sought to be converted
into criminal proceedings, after several years of civil
litigation. We are of the opinion that the criminal
process cannot be permitted to become a weapon of
harassment and coercion in disputes concerning title
over immovable property.

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024



53. We are conscious of the principles laid down
by this Court in the recent decision of Neeharika
Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (supra)
that courts should ordinarily refrain from interfering at
the threshold stage of investigation. However, the said
judgment itself recognises that where the allegations do
not disclose the commission of cognizable offences or
where criminal proceedings manifestly amount to abuse
of process, the High Court is duty-bound to exercise its
inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
54. The present case falls squarely within the
well-settled categories warranting interference under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C as Page 28 delineated in State
of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal,12 namely, where the dispute
is predominantly civil in nature, where the allegations
fail to disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged
offences, where the criminal proceedings are manifestly
attended with mala fide intention, where there is
extraordinary and unexplained delay, and where
continuation of the prosecution would amount to abuse
of process of court."

10. The aforesaid findings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
above judgment is squarely applicable to the facts and
circumstances of the present case. The complaint appears to
have been lodged against the petitioners by respondent No.2 is
out of vengeance. Therefore, continuation of the criminal
proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 would
amount to an abuse of the process of Court. Accordingly, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER

i. The Criminal Petition is allowed .

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56690
CRL.P No. 683 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010036072024




ii. The FIR registered against the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 in
Crime No.207/2023 dated
08.07.2023 by the Sarjapura Police
Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 471, 468, 447, 420,
379, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, on the
file of Prl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and
JMFC, Court, Anekal, Bengaluru
Rural District, is hereby quashed.


SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE











GPG
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2