MAHAMMAD RAFIQ ANKALE S/O ABDUL KHADAR vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.100198 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
BETWEEN:
MAHAMMAD RAFIQ ANKALE S/O. ABDUL KHADAR,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND
RD
BUSINESS, R/O. 3 CROSS,
NEAR KARNATAKA GADI KHARKHANE,
MEHBOOB NAGAR, DHARWAD-580008.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI MOHAMMEDMISRIKHAN A. PATHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
(TROUGH I.O. DHARWAD SUB URBAN POLICE STATION),
R/BY H.C.G.P. HIGH COURT BENCH,
DHARWAD HIGH COURT BUILDING-580001.
2. SMT. SALEEMA W/O. KHADARSAB BATANWALE,
AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
ND
R/O. SONAPUR, 2 CROSS, DHARWAD-580112.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI S. S. DODDALINGANNAVAR, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.528 OF BNSS
(U/S.482 OF CR.P.C.), PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN
C.C.NO.1589/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC COURT DHARWAD AND QUASH THE ORDER OF COGNIZANCE
DATED 15/03/2025 IN C.C NO.1589/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT DHARWAD FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 406 OF I.P.C AGAINST
THIS PETITIONER/ACCUSED ARISING FROM DHARWAD SUB-URBAN
P.S. CRIME NO.50/2019 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (Section 528 of BNSS, 2023) seeking to
quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.1589/2025 pending on
the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court,
Dharwad (in connection with Dharwad Sub-Urban PS Crime
No.50/2019), registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 406 of IPC.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case in nutshell
are as under:
On 18.02.2019 in between 02:00 to 02:30 p.m., the
defacto complainant who is mother-in-law of the
petitioner/accused after locking her residential house,
entrusted the keys of the house to the petitioner who is the
husband of her daughter, reposing full trust and responsibility
upon him for the safe keeping of the house and its contents.
The complainant and her family members had been to
th
Koppadakeri in connection with completion of 9 day death
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
rituals of her brother and she was away from her house during
this period. However, taking undue advantage of the
entrustment of the property and the absence of the
complainant and her family members, the petitioner with
dishonest intention criminally breached her trust reposed in
him, unauthorizedly removed from the complainant's house
gold ornaments weighing approximately 215 grams worth
Rs.4,30,000/- and original records pertains to her house
property and cash of Rs.2,00,000/-, thereby caused wrongful
loss to the complainant. Thus, the petitioner/accused
committed an offence of criminal breach of trust. On
02.04.2019, the defacto complainant lodged the complaint to
the respondent police. In turn, the respondent police took up
investigation and filed ‘B’ report to the jurisdictional Court. In
turn, the defacto complainant submitted her objections to the
‘B’ report, and the trial Court preceded with the inquiry. Taking
exceptions to the same, the petitioner/accused has filed this
petition seeking to quash the entire proceedings.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently
contended that prima facie there is no ingredients of Section
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
406 of Indian Penal Code and the allegations made in the
complaint are general and omnibus in nature. In fact, the
matter was investigated by the jurisdictional police and the
Investigating Officer submitted the ‘B’ report, and during
investigation or inquiry, no recovery is took place. Further,
there is a delay of 1 month, 15 days in lodging the complaint.
Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to allow the
petition.
4. Learned HCGP vehemently contended that there is
prima facie allegations against this petitioner and the
ingredients of Section 406 of IPC are made out. Now the
petitioner is disputing the question of fact, which cannot be
gone into under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Hence, learned HCGP
prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. The perusal of the material available on record, it
appears that the defacto complainant made allegation against
her own son-in-law alleging that he committed criminal breach
of trust. As per the material on record, the defacto complainant
made allegations that on 18.02.2019, she handed over house
keys to the petitioner reposing full trust and responsibility.
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
However, the petitioner unauthorizedly removed gold
ornaments, cash and other valuable documents from her house
in this case.
6. On perusal of the grounds urged in this petition, the
petitioner is disputing the question of fact that cannot be gone
into under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The similar view was
taken by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Neeharika
Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and
1
.
others
7. From perusal of the FIR and other materials, the
prima facie case is made out so as to attract sections 406 of
the IPC. The complaint and charge sheet prima facie discloses
the cognizable offence. It is no more res integra that excess of
powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C to quash criminal
proceedings is only when an allegation made in the FIR and
other materials, i.e., objections to the ‘B’ report constitutes the
ingredients of the offence alleged. Interference by this Court
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C to prevent the abuse of
1
AIR 2021 SC 1918
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
process of law in the Court or otherwise secure the ends of
justice.
8. It is settled law that any documents or defence
statement produced by the accused for his defence cannot be
looked into by Court, except in very exceptional circumstances,
at the initial stage of the criminal proceedings. It is trite law
that, this Court cannot embark upon the appreciation in the
evidence while considering the petition filed under Section 482
of the Cr.P.C for quashing criminal proceedings. It is clear from
the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, if a prima facie
case is made out disclosing the ingredients of the offence
alleged against the accused, the court cannot quash the
criminal proceedings.
9. In the considered opinion of this court, having
regard to the materials on the basis of which the other
materials has been filed, this is not a fit case to invoke Section
482 of the Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings, as the matter
requires a full-fledged trial. Hence, criminal petition is liable to
be dismissed.
Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed .
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:18383
CRL.P No. 100198 of 2026
CNR: KAHC020024322026
Pending I.A’s, if any, stand disposed of, as they do not
survive for any consideration.
The observations made herein are only for the purpose of
disposal of this petition.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
MBS /CT-AN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24