SMT. B ESHWARAMMA vs STATE BY

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


TH
DATED THIS THE 7 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 862 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS)-)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. B ESHWARAMMA
W/O LATE. SRI. P NATARAJ
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

2. SRI.P. N VISHWANATH REDDY
S/O LATE. SRI. P. NATARAJ
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

3. SRI. N MANJUNATH
S/O LATE. SRI. P. NATARAJ
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

4. SMT. N. USHA
D/O LATE. SRI. P. NATARAJ
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS

ALL ARE R/AT NO. 181, R.V ROAD,
VV PURAM BENGALURU -560004.

…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NANDISH GOWDA G B., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE BY
SARJAPURA POLICE STATION
REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001.

2. SRI. RAMAKRISHNA NAIDU











Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


S/O NAGARAJA NAIDU
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT NO.765,
TH TH
10 CROSS, 4 MAIN
RBI LAYOUT, J.P NAGARA
TH
7 STAGE, BENGALURU-560078

…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. ASHWINKUMAR., V.H., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN
CR.NO.0010/2025 REGSITERED BY THE SARJAPURA POLICE
STATION FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 420, 504, 506 AND SEC. 34 OF
IPC THE SAME IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE
(JR.DVN.) AND JMFC COURT, ANEKAL, BENGALURU RURAL
DISTRICT, BENGALURU

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER


1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the
following reliefs;
a. Quash the FIR in Crime NO.0010/2025
registered by the Sarjapura Police station for the
offences punishable under section 420, 504,506
and section 34 of IPC the same is pending on the
file of the Principle Civil Judge, (Jr.Dvn) and JMFC
court, Anekal, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru
in the interest of justice and equity.

b. And grant such other order or directions as this
Hon'ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of
the case including, costs in the interest of justice
and equity.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025




2. Respondent No. 2 lodged a complaint alleging that,
on 10.12.2014, respondent No. 2 and the petitioners
had entered into an agreement for the purchase of
certain lands for a consideration of Rs. 1,50,00,000/-
. In that regard, a Memorandum of Understanding
(MoU) was executed in respect of 20 guntas of land
in Survey No. 161 of Komasandra Village, Sarjapur
Hobli, Bengaluru Urban District. Out of the agreed
consideration, a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- was paid,
and the balance was payable subsequently.


3. It is alleged that the complainant repeatedly followed
up with the accused persons for registration of the
sale deed, but the same was postponed by the
petitioners on one pretext or another. The
complainant is stated to have travelled abroad and,
upon his return, again sought information regarding
registration of the sale deed. It is further alleged that
he left India in 2018 and returned in 2024. On
26.02.2024, he once again contacted the petitioners
regarding registration of the sale deed, whereupon
the accused allegedly threatened him, stating that
they would not register the land and that, if he
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


visited the property or approached them again, he
would be killed.


4. On the basis of these allegations, Crime No. 10/2025
came to be registered by the Sarjapura Police Station
on 15.01.2025 for offences punishable under
Sections 420, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code. The registration of the said crime is under
challenge in the present proceedings.


5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that civil
disputes between the parties are already the subject
matter of arbitral proceedings. In that regard, the
petitioners had instituted proceedings under Section
11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in
CMP No. 12/2017, which came to be allowed on
02.11.2017 by appointing a former Judge of this
Court as the sole arbitrator.


6. Subsequently, as the arbitrator was unavailable,
another former Judge of this Court was appointed as
the substitute sole arbitrator on 04.04.2018. As the
substitute arbitrator was thereafter appointed to a
Government post, he was replaced by another
former Judge of this Court, who was appointed as
arbitrator on 02.07.2025. The arbitral proceedings
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


are stated to have subsequently terminated.
According to the petitioners, the proceedings could
not be continued because respondent No. 2 had
failed to deposit his share of the arbitrator's fees.
Respondent No. 2, however, disputes the said
assertion and contends that the requisite amount had
been deposited.


7. Be that as it may, several other proceedings have
also arisen between the parties. These include
Commercial A.P. No. 9/2020, challenging the order
passed by the learned arbitrator on 15.07.2019;
W.P. No. 200902/2022, which came to be disposed
of by this Court on 01.07.2024; and W.A. No.
1120/2024, which is stated to be pending.


8. Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore,
submits that the disputes between the parties arise
out of the MoU and are already the subject matter of
the arbitral proceedings and the connected litigation.
It is contended that the complaint lodged on
15.01.2025 is an attempt to impart a criminal colour
to what is essentially a civil dispute and to exert
pressure upon the petitioners while the disputes
remain unresolved. On these grounds, learned
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


counsel seeks quashing of the impugned
proceedings.


9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No. 2 submits that the petitioners have suppressed
material facts, both in the petition and during the
course of arguments. On that basis, dismissal of the
petition is sought.


10. Having considered the material placed before this
Court and the rival submissions, it is evident that
proceedings under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996, were instituted in CMP
No. 12/2017 in relation to the disputes arising out of
the MoU dated 10.12.2014. The parties continue to
dispute responsibility for the subsequent course of
those proceedings, particularly with regard to
payment of the arbitrator's fees. The fact remains,
however, that arbitral proceedings were initiated in
relation to the very MoU which forms the basis of the
complaint lodged by respondent No. 2 on
15.01.2025.


11. The complaint, as set out in the material presently
under consideration, arises from the alleged failure
to register the sale deed in respect of the property
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


covered by the MoU and the alleged threats issued
when respondent No. 2 subsequently sought
registration. The underlying transaction and the
rights claimed by respondent No. 2 are thus closely
connected with the disputes arising out of the said
MoU.


12. A consideration of the material placed on record
would indicate that the dispute between the parties
has its genesis in the Memorandum of Understanding
dated 10.12.2014, entered into for the purchase of
the subject property for a consideration of
Rs.1,50,00,000/-. The complainant alleges that,
despite payment of Rs.50,00,000/-, the petitioners
failed to execute the sale deed in his favour. The
disputes arising out of the very same Memorandum
of Understanding had led to the institution of arbitral
proceedings in CMP No.12/2017 and have also given
rise to several connected proceedings before this
Court and other forums.


13. The subsequent proceedings between the parties,
therefore, demonstrate that the controversy
essentially concerns the rights and obligations arising
out of the Memorandum of Understanding, including
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


the alleged failure to complete the sale transaction.
The rights claimed by respondent No.2 in respect of
the subject property and the obligations allegedly
breached by the petitioners are matters arising from
the said transaction and have been the subject of the
disputes pursued by the parties before the arbitral
and other forums.


14. The mere fact that a contractual dispute has arisen
between the parties does not, by itself, preclude the
initiation of criminal proceedings. However, criminal
proceedings cannot be permitted to become a means
of resolving a dispute which is essentially civil in
nature, unless the allegations, taken at face value,
disclose the ingredients of a criminal offence. In the
present case, the allegations concerning the failure
to register the sale deed arise directly from the
contractual transaction covered by the Memorandum
of Understanding dated 10.12.2014. The parties have
already been litigating over their respective rights
and obligations arising therefrom, and the complaint
has been instituted against that background.


15. The allegations of cheating must be examined in the
context of the nature of the transaction and the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


material placed on record. A subsequent failure to
perform a contractual obligation, without the
requisite ingredients of the offence being disclosed,
would not by itself constitute cheating. The
complaint, as presented in the circumstances of the
present case, essentially seeks to pursue through
criminal proceedings a dispute concerning the
performance of the Memorandum of Understanding
and the complainant's claim to the subject property.


16. Having regard to the nature of the transaction, the
history of the litigation between the parties and the
disputes already pursued in relation to the
Memorandum of Understanding dated 10.12.2014,
this Court is of the considered opinion that the
dispute is essentially civil in nature and that the
criminal process has been invoked to give a criminal
colour to the underlying contractual dispute. The
continuation of the impugned proceedings, in these
circumstances, would amount to an abuse of the
process of law. The impugned proceedings are,
therefore, liable to be quashed.


17. In that view of the matter, this Court passes the
following:
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru
Verified

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56047
CRL.P No. 862 of 2025


CNR: KAHC010047892025


ORDER
allowed
i) The petition stands .

ii) FIR in Crime No.10/2025 registered by the
Sarjapura Police Station for the offences
punishable under Section 420, 504, 506 and
Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of
Principal Civil Judge, (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC Court,
Anekal, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru is
quashed.

Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
28/10/2026, 12:04, Bengaluru

Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE





PRS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12