HAFEEZ KHASIM vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14967 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)-)
BETWEEN:
HAFEEZ KHASIM
S/O LATE BASITH KHASIM,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
AT PRESENT RESIDING AT
TH
4 MAIN, OPPOSITE TUDA OFFICE,
KUVEMPUNAGARA,
TUMAKURU CITY 572 103
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A. S. KULKARNI &
SRI. RAKSHAN M.K., ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY TUMAKURU WOMEN POLICE STATION,
TUMAKURU 572 103.
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE 560 001.
2. SMT NAZIMA
W/O LATE GAIBAN KHAN,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT BIBIJAN LAYOUT
B H ROAD, GUBBI GATE,
TUMAKURU 572 101.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RANJITH KUMAR N., HCGP FOR R1;
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
SRI. MOHMMED UMMAR FAROOQ., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S
528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET REGISTERED
AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN TUMAKURU WOMEN P.S. IN
CR.NO.102/2025(C.C.NO.176/2025) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE
P/U/S 75(1)(ii),351(2) OF BNS 2023 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED
II ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C TUMAKURU.
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 petitioner is before this Court seeking for the
following reliefs:
a) Quash the charge sheet registered against the
petitioner in Tumakuru Women P.S. in
Cr.No.102/2025(C.C.No.176/2025) for the alleged
offence p/u/s 75(1)(ii),351(2) of BNS 2023 on the file
of the Learned II Addl.Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C
Tumakuru.
2. Respondent No.2 lodged a complaint on 04.06.2025,
pursuant to which an FIR in Crime No.102/2025
came to be registered by Tumakuru Women Police
Station for the offences punishable under Sections
74, 75(1)(ii), 75(1)(iv), 351(2) and 352 of the BNS.
3. The allegations in the complaint are that one Heena
had introduced respondent No.2 to the petitioner.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
Respondent No.2, being in financial distress and
desirous of obtaining a loan, had expressed that
obtaining financial assistance from a financial
institution would be difficult. She had, therefore,
requested the petitioner to provide her financial
assistance without charging interest. Pursuant
thereto, the petitioner is stated to have advanced
certain amounts of money to respondent No.2.
4. There being a delay in repayment of the amounts,
several telephonic conversations allegedly took place
between the petitioner and respondent No.2
regarding repayment. Ultimately, respondent No.2
claimed that the entire amount had been repaid.
However, the petitioner thereafter allegedly insisted
upon payment of interest. This aspect was taken up
by respondent No.2 with Heena, who assured her
that she would resolve the dispute and requested
respondent No.2 to come to the petitioner's house on
21.04.2025.
5. It is alleged that, on 21.04.2025, respondent No.2
went near the petitioner's house at about 9.00 a.m.
and found that the house was locked and nobody
was present. She is stated to have contacted Heena
and informed her of the same. Heena allegedly
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
informed her that the petitioner would be arriving
shortly and that she too was leaving her house and
would come there.
6. Shortly thereafter, the petitioner arrived and,
noticing respondent No.2 and her son-in-law waiting
outside, called them inside the house for discussion.
After some time, the son-in-law of respondent No.2
is stated to have left the premises as he was getting
delayed for work. At that stage, the petitioner
allegedly sought sexual favours from respondent
No.2 by promising to give her money and provide
whatever she desired.
7. Respondent No.2 further alleged that she managed
to escape from the petitioner with considerable
difficulty, contacted her son-in-law and returned
home. She claims that her mental health was
affected by the incident and that she was undergoing
treatment. It is in that background that the
complaint came to be lodged on 04.06.2025.
8. Investigation having been completed, a charge-sheet
came to be filed on 16.07.2025 for the offences
punishable under Sections 75(1)(ii) and 351(2) of
the BNS. It is challenging the said proceedings that
the petitioner is before this Court.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
9. The submission of Sri. Rakshan M.K., learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, is that, during the
course of investigation, a further statement of
respondent No.2 came to be recorded on
06.06.2025. In the said statement, respondent No.2
has categorically stated that, on 21.04.2025, she had
visited the petitioner's house only to resolve the
disputes relating to the financial arrangement
between them.
10. Though she is stated to have alleged that the
petitioner looked at her in an inappropriate manner,
the specific allegation that the petitioner had
demanded or requested sexual favours from her does
not find a place in the said statement. On the
contrary, respondent No.2 has categorically stated
that she had not made any such allegation against
the petitioner.
11. Learned counsel further submits that respondent
No.2 has also stated that she had not telephoned
Heena in the manner alleged in the original
complaint. Thus, the essential allegation forming the
basis of the offence under Section 75(1)(ii) of the
BNS is expressly disowned by respondent No.2
herself during the course of investigation.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
12. It is contended that, notwithstanding the aforesaid
further statement, the Investigating Officer has
proceeded to file a charge-sheet for the offence
punishable under Section 75(1)(ii) of the BNS. When
the complainant herself has categorically denied the
alleged demand for sexual favours, continuation of
the prosecution would serve no purpose.
13. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 does
not dispute the further statement dated 06.06.2025
and its contents. Learned HCGP also does not dispute
the said statement.
14. Heard Sri. Rakshan M.K., learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri. Ranjith Kumar N., learned HCGP
appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri. Mohammed
Ummar Farooq, learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.2. Perused the papers.
15. Before considering the allegations and the material
collected during investigation, it would be
appropriate to extract Section 528 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which preserves
the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.
" 528. Saving of inherent powers of High Court.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or affect the
inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may
be necessary to give effect to any order under this Sanhita, or
to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice."
16. The inherent jurisdiction of this Court can be
exercised where the allegations made in the
complaint and the material collected during
investigation do not disclose the essential ingredients
of the offences alleged, or where continuation of the
criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of
the process of law.
17. Section 75 of the BNS, 2023 is reproduced hereunder
for easy reference:
" 75. Sexual harassment:
(1) A man committing any of the following act:
(i) physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and
explicit sexual overtures; or
(ii) a demand or request for sexual favours; or
(iii) showing pornography against the will of a woman; or
(iv) making sexually coloured remarks, shall be guilty of the
offence of sexual harassment.
(2) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (i) or
clause (ii) or clause (iii) of sub-section (1) shall be punished
with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to
three years, or with fine, or with both.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
(3) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (iv)
of sub-section (1) shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to one year, or
with fine, or with both."
18. What has been invoked against the petitioner in the
charge-sheet is Section 75(1)(ii) of the BNS, which
specifically deals with a demand or request for sexual
favours.
19. The essential ingredient of the said provision is the
existence of a demand or request for sexual favours
by the accused. Unless such demand or request is
alleged and supported by the material collected
during investigation, the offence under the said
provision cannot be sustained.
20. In the present case, the original complaint contains
an allegation that, after the son-in-law of respondent
No.2 left the petitioner's house, the petitioner sought
sexual favours from respondent No.2 by promising
her money and other benefits.
21. However, the further statement of respondent No.2
recorded on 06.06.2025 presents a materially
different version of the incident. In the said
statement, respondent No.2 has specifically stated
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
that she had visited the petitioner's house to resolve
the financial dispute between them. Though she has
referred to the petitioner having looked at her in an
inappropriate manner, she has categorically stated
that no demand for sexual favours was made by him.
22. It is significant that the said further statement is not
merely silent with regard to the demand for sexual
favours. Respondent No.2 has specifically disowned
having made such an allegation against the
petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.2 and the learned HCGP do not
dispute the recording or contents of the said
statement.
23. The allegation of the petitioner having looked at
respondent No.2 in an inappropriate manner cannot,
by itself, be treated as a demand or request for
sexual favours within the meaning of Section
75(1)(ii) of the BNS.
24. Though the original complaint contains an allegation
which, if established, would attract the provision, the
subsequent statement of the very complainant,
recorded during investigation, specifically negates
the essential ingredient of the offence for which the
charge-sheet has been filed.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
25. In the absence of any other material brought to the
notice of this Court to substantiate the alleged
demand or request for sexual favours, the
continuation of the prosecution under Section
75(1)(ii) of the BNS cannot be sustained.
26. Section 351 of the BNS is reproduced hereunder for
easy reference:
"351. Criminal Intimidation.
(1) Whoever threatens another by any means, with any injury
to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or
reputation of any one in whom that person is interested, with
intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to
do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do
any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the
means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits
criminal intimidation.
Explanation.—A threat to injure the reputation of any deceased
person in whom the person threatened is interested, is within
this section.
(2) Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation shall
be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
(3) Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation by
threatening to cause death or grievous hurt, or to cause the
destruction of any property by fire, or to cause an offence
punishable with death or imprisonment for life, or with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or
to impute unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
(4) Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation by an
anonymous communication, or having taken precaution to
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
conceal the name or abode of the person from whom the
threat comes, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two years, in
addition to the punishment provided for the offence under sub-
section (1)."
27. A perusal of Section 351 indicates that, for the
offence of criminal intimidation to be attracted, there
must be a threat of injury to the person, reputation
or property of another, accompanied by an intention
to cause alarm or to compel such person to do an act
which he or she is not legally bound to do, or to omit
an act which he or she is legally entitled to do.
28. Sub-section (2) of Section 351 merely prescribes the
punishment for the offence of criminal intimidation.
Therefore, the essential ingredients of the offence
are those contained in sub-section (1), and the same
must be disclosed before the punishment prescribed
under sub-section (2) can be invoked.
29. In the present case, the allegation in the original
complaint insofar as criminal intimidation is
concerned is that the petitioner threatened
respondent No.2 with physical harm if she failed to
repay the amounts allegedly due.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
30. However, in the further statement dated 06.06.2025,
respondent No.2 has not sustained the said
allegation. The further statement confines itself to
the allegation that the petitioner looked at her in an
inappropriate manner. There is no specific allegation
in the said statement of any threat having been
extended by the petitioner, much less a threat
intended to cause alarm to respondent No.2 or to
compel her to act or refrain from acting in a
particular manner.
31. Thus, the material collected during investigation does
not disclose the essential ingredients of criminal
intimidation as contemplated under Section 351(1) of
the BNS. Consequently, the offence punishable under
Section 351(2) of the BNS cannot be sustained.
32. It is also relevant to notice that the FIR initially
included offences under Sections 74, 75(1)(ii),
75(1)(iv), 351(2) and 352 of the BNS. However,
upon completion of investigation, the charge-sheet
has been filed only for the offences punishable under
Sections 75(1)(ii) and 351(2) of the BNS.
33. Therefore, the consideration in the present petition is
confined to the ingredients of the two offences for
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
which the petitioner has actually been charge-
sheeted.
34. This Court is conscious that the mere existence of
inconsistencies between the complaint and a
subsequent statement of a complainant would not, in
every case, be sufficient to quash criminal
proceedings. Ordinarily, the credibility of the
witnesses and the effect of their statements are
matters for appreciation during trial.
35. However, the circumstances of the present case are
somewhat different. The further statement dated
06.06.2025 specifically disowns the allegation
forming the essential ingredient of Section 75(1)(ii)
and does not sustain the allegation of criminal
intimidation. Significantly, the authenticity and
contents of the said further statement are not
disputed by either the complainant or the State.
36. In the absence of any other material disclosed during
investigation to substantiate the alleged demand for
sexual favours or the alleged criminal intimidation,
this Court is of the considered opinion that the
continuation of the proceedings for the offences
punishable under Sections 75(1)(ii) and 351(2) of
the BNS would serve no useful purpose.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60690
CRL.P No. 14967 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010708622025
37. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the petitioner has made out
a case for exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this
Court under Section 528 of the BNSS to prevent
abuse of the process of law.
38. Accordingly, the petition is required to be allowed.
ORDER
(i) The criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) The charge-sheet and the consequential
proceedings in C.C. No.176/2025, arising out of
Crime No.102/2025 registered by Tumakuru
Women Police Station, for the offences
punishable under Sections 75(1)(ii) and 351(2)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, insofar
as the petitioner is concerned, are hereby
quashed.
(iii) It is made clear that the observations made
hereinabove are confined to the consideration
of the present petition.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
05/11/2026, 13:38, Bengaluru
Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
LN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58