SHUBHA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 15 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7136 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)
/ 528(BNSS)-)
BETWEEN:
1. SHUBHA
(SHUBA RAI AS PER FIR)
D/O M. SHRIDHAR RAL,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT C/O KAMALAKSHA,
2-46/5, SHIVAGIRI HOUSE,
SURYA ROAD,
BELTHANGADY TALUK,
UJIRE 574 240.
2. MOHAN,
(MOHAN BOLANGADI AS PER FIR)
S/O BABU NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT 1-171/73,
SHREE SAI SADANA,
MUGRODI ROAD,
BHATRA KUMERU
MANAGLORE, D.K-575 008
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. KETHAN KUMAR.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BELTHANGADY POLICE STATION
REPRESENT BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX,
BENGALURU-560 001.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
2. THANUSH M. SHETTY,
S/O MOHAN SHETTY,
AGED 24 YEARS
R/AT SHREE KRISHNA,
NEAR ANUGRAHA SCHOOL,
UJIRE, BELTHANGADY TALUK,
DAKSHUNA KANNADA 574 240.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RANJITH KUMAR.N., HCGP FOR R1;
R2-SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S
528 BNSS) PRAYING QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS (ACCUSED NO.1 AND), IN CRIME NO.FIR IN CRIME
NO.26/2025 AGAINST PETITIONERS BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE
(BELTHANGADI POLICE STATION) PENDING BEFORE PRINCIPAL
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT BELTHANGADI D.K DISTRICT, FOR
THE O/P/U/S 353(2) OF BNS, 2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A.
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 registered against the petitioners
(Accused No.1 and), in Crime No. FIR in Crime
No.26/2025 against petitioners by the
respondent police (Belthangadi Police Station)
pending before Principal Civil Judge and JMFC
court Belthangadi D.K District, for the o/p/u/s
353(2) of BNS, 2023 vide Annexure-A.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
b) Pass any other Order(s) or Direction(s) as this
Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case in the interest of
justice
2. Respondent No. 2 lodged a complaint on 24.04.2025,
on the basis of which Crime No. 26/2025 was
registered by Beltangadi Police Station for the
offence punishable under Section 353(2) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred
to as ‘the BNS’). The petitioners have approached
this Court seeking to quash the said FIR.
3. The allegations made in the complaint are as under:
ೆ
,
ಉಪ ೕ
ೕ ಕರು
,
ೆಳಂಗ ೕ ಾೆ
,
ದ ಣ ಕನ ಡ ೆ
.
ಕ!ಾ"ಟಕ $ಾಜ&
:: 24/04/2025
'!ಾಂಕ
:
ಇಂದ
, ,
)ೕ ಕೃಷ- ಅನುಗಹ 0ಾ ೆ ಬ2 ೆ
, . . .-574240
ಉ $ೆ ೆಳಂಗ 3ಾ ದ ಕ
,
ಮ5ೋದಯ$ೇ
: ,
8ಷಯ ಆ: ೈ: =ಾನ5ಾ ಸಮು?ಾಯದ 8ರುದ@ದ ಪ*ಚರ ೆ ಮತು CೈಬD
Eರುಕುಳದ 8ರುದ@ ತ ಣದ Fಾನೂನು ಕ*ಮ Fೈ ೊಳGHವ ಬ ೆJ 8ನಂK
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
, ,
!ಾನು ತನುL ಎಂ 0ೆNO ಉ $ೆ PಾQ 5ಾಗೂ ದ ಣ ಕನ ಡದ 8?ಾ&R"
,
!ಾಯಕ$ಾSಯೂ Cಾ=ಾ ಕ 5ೋ$ಾಟ ಾರ!ಾSಯೂ Fಾಯ" ವ"TಸುKರುವ ವ&E
5 2025 ,
'!ಾಂಕ ಏV*W
ಂದ ನXY ೆ ನZೆಯುK ರುವ 5ೆಣಸು[ಾN ಸಂಚುFೊಂಡ
.
=ಾನ5ಾ ಕರ ಆ: ೈ: ?ಾ2ಗಳ ಬ ೆJ ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ದೂರು ೕಡು3ೇ!ೆ ಈ
,
ದುಷ^ತ&ದ ಪ*ಮುಖPಾS ಶುaಾ $ೈ 5ಾಗೂ bೕಹ: ೋಳಂಾ ಎಂಬುವವರು
, ,
c"ಷOPಾS ಸಂಚು ರೂVQ ನನ =ಾನ5ಾ =ಾಡುವdದು ನನ Cೆ ೕT3ೆಯರ
,
PೈಯE ಕ3ೆ ಉಲ ಂeಸುವdದು 5ಾಗೂ ನನ Xೕ ೆ ಅ[ಾಯ ಉಂಟು=ಾಡುವ NOನ
.
Cಾ=ಾ ಕ fಾಲ3ಾಣಗಳನು ಬಳQFೊಂ ?ಾg$ೆ
:
Xೕಲhಂಡ ಆ$ೋಪಗಳG 5ಾಗೂ ಅಪ$ಾಧಗಳG TೕSPೆ
1. :
ಬದ ಾjQದ ಸು'g ೇಖನಗಳ ಹಂkFೆ
"
ನನ 5ಾಗೂ ನನ Cೆ ೕT3ೆಯರ ೕlೊಗಳನು fೋ Q ಬ ಾರ ಗಭ"ಬಲವಂತದ
"
ಗಭ"[ಾತ ಎಂಬ nೋಟು ಆ$ೋಪಗoೆpಂ' ೆ ನಕ ಸು'g ಪK*Fೆ ದೃಶ&ಗಳನು
. .
ಹರಡ ಾS?ೆ ಈ ಎಲ ಆ$ೋಪಗಳG ಸಂಪqಣ" ಸುಳGH 5ಾಗೂ $ಾrಾರPಾS?ೆ
2. :
ಉ?ೆgೕಶಪqವ"ಕ ಸಮು?ಾಯ ?ೆsೕಷ ಪ*ಚರ ೆ
" " ,
ಈ ಆಕಮಣದ ಸಣ- ಪಯತ PಾS Fೆtಸ ಹುಡುS ಎಂಬಂ3ೆ ತ[ಾuS kK*Q ನನ ನು
,
?ೆsೕಷದ FೇಂದvಂದುPಾSಸುವ ಪಯತ ನZೆ'?ೆ Tೕ ೆ ಸ=ಾಜದ 0ಾಂK ೆ
.
ಧFೆhwಾಗುವ ಪ*ಯತ ವನು =ಾಡ ಾS?ೆ
3. :
nೋlಾ Cಾ=ಾ ಕ fಾಲ3ಾಣ nಾ3ೆಗಳG ಮತು ಅ) ೕಲ 8ಷಯ ಹಂkFೆ
ನನ 5ೆಸ
ನ ತಪdu ರೂಪ?ೊಂ' ೆ xೇ ಬುy 5ಾಗೂ ಇ: Cಾz ಾ*{ nಾ3ೆಗಳನು
, , (
3ೆ$ೆಯ ಾSದುg ಅ) ೕಲ |ಾ} ಗಳG ~ೂೕರ ಅಪ=ಾನFಾ
kತ*ಗಳG ಪdರುಷರ
),
ಅಂ ಾಂಗ kತ*ಗಳG 5ಾಗೂ ಅ3ಾ&|ಾರ Vೕ 3ೆಯ 3ಾjಯ ರೂ[ಾಂತ
ತ kತ*ಗಳ
.
ಹಂkFೆ ನZೆ'?ೆ ಇದು CೈಬD Fೆtಂ =ಾತ*ವಲ ?ೆ =ಾನ8ೕಯ =ೌಲ&ಗಳ Tೕ!ಾಯ
.
ಉಲ ಂಘ!ೆwಾS?ೆ
4. 20 :
ಕೂh 5ೆಚು• nೋlಾ nಾ3ೆಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ಸಂಘNತ ?ಾ2
,
ಇ: Cಾz ಾ{ xೇ ಬುy ಮತು Nsಟ D ಈ ಕಳHkತಗಳG 5ಾಗೂ ಸುಳGH
20 .
ಕ‚ಾನಕಗಳನು Ehಂತ 5ೆಚು• nಾ3ೆಗಳG ಹರ Pೆ ಇದ
ಂದ ನನ Xೕ ೆ 5ಾಗೂ ನನ
.
ಪ
ಚಯದ Qƒೕಯರ ೕವನದ Xೕ ೆ ಬಲPಾದ ನಷO ಉಂlಾS?ೆ
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
5.
bೕಹ: ೋಳಂಾಯು ಯೂಟೂ&„ ನ 5ಾEರುವ =ಾನ5ಾ ಕರ
:
8 …ೕಗಳG
" "
ಸsತಹವನು E†ನW ಪKFೋದ&† ಎಂದು ಕ$ೆಯು3ಾ ಈ ವ&E ಯು Fೆಳಕಂಡ ಸುಳGH
:
ಆ$ೋಪಗಳನು 8 …ೕಗಳ ಹಂk?ಾg$ೆ
•
,
ಬ ಾ3ಾhರ ಗಭ"[ಾತFೆh ಬಲವಂತ ೊ2Qದ ಆ$ೋಪ
•
Sowjanya
ಪ*ಕರಣFೆh ನನ ಸಂಬಂಧವನು ಕೃತಕPಾS fೋ Q ನನ kಕhಪu ಮ5ೇ‡
0ೆNO Kಮˆ$ೋ 5ೆಸರನು ಬಳQ =ಾನ5ಾ
•
Fೆtಸ 8Pಾಹ Fಾ‰gjಂದ [ಾ$ಾಗುK ರುವಂ3ೆ 3ೋ
ಸುವ ಸುಳGH
•
!ಾನು Tಂದು ?ೇPಾಲಯಗಳನು ಂ'ಸು3ೇ!ೆ ಎಂದು
•
POCSO
Fಾ‰g ಅನsಯ ನನ Xೕ ೆ ಾಲE Xೕ ೆ ಅ3ಾ&|ಾರ ಆ$ೋಪ
6. :
ತಪdu $ಾಜEೕಯ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಆ$ೋಪ
INTUC ,
!ಾನು ಸದಸ&!ಾSದುg ಅ ಯ†ತ ಚಟುವNFೆಗಳ 3ೊಡSರುPೆ!ೆಂದು ಸುಳGH
.
ಆ$ೋಪ 5ಾಕ ಾS?ೆ
7. " " :
xೆಸD ಪ8ೕŠ ೋೋ nಾ3ೆಯ Tಂ'ರುವ ಶಂEತ ವ&E ಶುaಾ $ೈ
ಈ ಪಚರ ೆಯ ಅತ&ಂತ ಸEಯ nಾ3ೆ…ಂದರ Tಂ?ೆ ಶುaಾ $ೈ ಇ?ಾg$ೆ ಎಂಬ
. .
ಶE 0ಾ ಅನು=ಾನ8?ೆ ಇದನು ಕೂಡ ತ nೆೆ ಒಳಪ ಸಲು 8ನಂK
4. The allegations made in the complaint are that
respondent No. 2, Tanish M. Shetty, a resident of
Ujire, has been subjected to online harassment and a
campaign of defamation through various social media
platforms. The complaint alleges that, from
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
05.04.2025 onwards, certain persons, including the
petitioners, have been circulating false and
defamatory material against respondent No. 2 and
his friends.
5. The complaint further alleges that photographs of
respondent No. 2 and his friends were combined with
fabricated news reports containing false allegations
of forced abortion. It is also alleged that respondent
No. 2 was falsely portrayed as a Christian and that
such portrayal was intended to make him the target
of hostility.
6. The complaint alleges that fake Facebook and
Instagram accounts were created using a name
similar to that of respondent No. 2. Through such
accounts, obscene chats, insulting images and
morphed photographs were allegedly circulated. The
complaint also refers to the circulation of such
material through more than twenty social media
accounts, including Instagram, Facebook and Twitter.
7. The complaint further alleges that videos uploaded
on YouTube by one of the persons named therein
contained false allegations against respondent No. 2,
including allegations of rape, forced abortion,
involvement in the Soujanya case, insulting Hindu
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
temples and offences under the POCSO Act. It is also
alleged that false claims were made regarding
respondent No. 2’s political associations and
activities.
8. The complaint refers to a social media account
operating under the name ‘Professor Praveen Lobo’
and expresses suspicion that one of the persons
named in the complaint was behind the said account.
Respondent No. 2 sought investigation into the
alleged online campaign and the persons responsible
for it.
9. The petitioners seek quashing of the FIR on the
ground that the allegations arise out of the dispute
surrounding the Soujanya murder case. Learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that two groups
have emerged in connection with the said case and
that both groups have been posting messages
against each other on social media. It is contended
that the complaint has been lodged out of
vengeance, as the petitioners support the
Dharmasthala temple.
10. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners
is that the allegations must be viewed in the context
of the ongoing dispute between the two groups and
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
that the petitioners cannot be prosecuted merely for
expressing their views or participating in the
exchange of messages on social media.
11. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
perused the papers.
12. The principal question for consideration is whether
the allegations made in the complaint, when taken at
face value, disclose the ingredients of an offence
under Section 353(2) of the BNS and whether the
FIR warrants interference at this stage.
13. Section 353(2) of the BNS deals with the making,
publishing or circulating of statements, false
information, rumours or reports, including through
electronic means, where such conduct is intended to
promote or is likely to promote enmity, hatred or ill-
will between different groups on grounds such as
religion, race, language or community, or is likely to
disturb public tranquillity.
14. The allegations in the complaint are not confined to
an exchange of opinions or criticism between two
groups. The complaint specifically alleges the
circulation of fabricated news reports, false
allegations, morphed photographs and other material
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
through multiple social media accounts. It further
alleges that respondent No. 2 was falsely portrayed
as belonging to a particular religious community and
that the material was circulated in a manner
intended to provoke hostility against him.
15. The complaint also refers to the circulation of
allegations connecting respondent No. 2 with serious
criminal acts and to the use of social media accounts
to disseminate such allegations. These allegations,
when considered together, raise a question as to
whether the material was circulated merely as part of
a debate between two groups or whether it was
circulated with the intention of promoting enmity,
hatred or ill-will between groups on grounds covered
by Section 353(2) of the BNS.
16. The contention that two groups have been posting
messages against each other does not, by itself,
render the alleged conduct lawful or take it outside
the scope of the penal provision. The existence of a
dispute between groups does not confer immunity
from criminal liability where the statements or
material circulated are alleged to satisfy the
ingredients of an offence. Each act of publication or
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
circulation must be examined on its own facts and in
the light of the applicable statutory requirements.
17. Similarly, the contention that the petitioners support
the Dharmasthala temple and that the complaint has
been lodged out of vengeance is a matter of defence.
Such a contention cannot, by itself, justify quashing
the FIR when the complaint contains specific
allegations which, if established, may attract the
offence alleged.
18. At this stage, the Court is not required to determine
whether the allegations made in the complaint are
true or whether the petitioners are responsible for
the alleged publications. The issue is whether the
allegations disclose a prima facie case requiring
investigation. The complaint refers to the nature of
the material allegedly circulated, the social media
platforms and accounts through which it was
disseminated, and the alleged attempt to portray
respondent No. 2 in a manner that could provoke
hostility on grounds of religion or community. These
allegations require investigation.
19. Whether the petitioners were in fact responsible for
creating or operating the social media accounts,
whether the alleged posts were published or
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
circulated by them, whether the material was false,
and whether the requisite intention or likelihood
contemplated under Section 353(2) of the BNS is
established are matters to be determined on the
basis of the material collected during investigation.
20. The identity of the persons operating the alleged
accounts and the source of the publications cannot
be conclusively determined in proceedings seeking
quashing of the FIR. These are factual matters which
require investigation, including examination of the
relevant social media accounts, digital records and
other material.
21. The allegations in the complaint, taken at face value,
disclose a case requiring investigation into the
alleged circulation of false and inflammatory material
through social media. The petitioners have not
established that the FIR is liable to be quashed at
this stage.
22. Accordingly, this Court finds no ground to interfere
with the registration of Crime No. 26/2025 by
exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58488
CRL.P No. 7136 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010329562025
23. In that view of the matter, this Court passes the
following:
ORDER
i. Criminal petition is dismissed.
ii. Respondent No.1 is directed to carry out
necessary investigation as regards the
allegations and counter allegations made by
the petitioner and submit a final inquiry report
at the earliest.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
30/10/2026, 17:09, Bengaluru)
Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
LN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0