MR BEERESHA vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 9 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 981 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) /
528(BNSS)-)
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8639 OF 2023 (482(Cr.PC)
/ 528(BNSS)-)
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3948 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC)
/ 528(BNSS)-)
IN CRL.P No. 981/2025
BETWEEN:
MR BEERESHA
S/O MR. KRISHNAPPA
AGED 24 YEARS
FACTORY WORKER,
RESIDENT OF GOVINDAPPA LAYOUT,
NEAR S.M.T. HOUSE,
SUBHASH NAGARA,
NELAMANGALA TOWN
BENGALURU RURAL DIST-562123
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. I.S PRAMOD CHANDRA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY NELAMANGALA TOWN POLICE
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTORS,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. MR. MADHU KUMAR
S/O LATE KRISHNAIAH
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
AGED 46 YEARS
RD
RESIDENT OF 3 CROSS, MG ROAD,
NEAR KRISHNA BAKERY
NELAMANGALA 562123
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. N. NARASEGOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C (U/S 528
BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 18.07.2023
SUMMONING THE ACCUSED-PETITIONER BY THE LEARNED IX ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JDUGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, AT
BENGALURU IN SC.NO.208/2023, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES
P/U/S 306,504,506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND ETC.
IN CRL.P NO. 8639/2023
BETWEEN:
SHASHIKALA
W/O CHENNAKESHAVA,
AGED 28 YEARS,
WORKING AS A JUNIOR HEALTH ASSISTANT,
ND
R/AT 85, 2 CROSS,
NELAMANGALA NEW TOWN,
NELAMANGALA TALUK,
BANGALORE - 562123
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJU C N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY NELAMANGALA TOWN POLICE
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,
BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE - 560001.
2. MADHUKUMAR
S/O LATE KRISHNAIAH,
R/AT 3 CROSS,
M.G.ROAD, NEAR KRISHNA BAKERY,
NELAMANGALA TOWN,
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
BANGALORE - 562123
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. K. NARASEGOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C
PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED AGAINST THE
PETITIONER IN S.C.NO.208/2023 ON THE FILE OF IX
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU
RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.31/2022
OF NELAMANGALA TOWN POLICE, BENGALURU FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 306, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC, BY ALLOWING
THIS PETITION.
IN CRL.P NO. 3948/2024
BETWEEN:
CHENNAKESHAVA
S/O BASAVARAJU
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
ND
R/A 85, 2 CROSS,
NELEMANGALA TALUK,
BANGALORE-562123.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJU C N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY NELAMANGALA TOWN POLICE
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE
PINCODE-560001
2. MADHUKUMAR
S/O LATE KRISHNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/A 3 CROSS
M G ROAD
NEAR KRISHNA BAKERY
NELAMANGALA TOWN
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
BANGALORE
PINCODE-562123
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. K. NARASEGOWDA. ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING
TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED AGAINST THE
PETITIONER IN S.C.NO.208/2023 ON THE FILE OF IX ADDL.
DISTRICT JUDGE AT BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,
BANGALORE, ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.31/2022 OF
NELAMANGALA TOWN POLICE, BANGALORE FOR THE OFFENCE
P/U/S 306, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC, BY ALLOWING THIS
PETITION.
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
ORAL ORDER
1.
Petitioner in Crl.P.No. 981/2025 is before this court
seeking for the following reliefs :
a) Set aside the order dtd 18.07.2023 summoning
the accused-petitioner by the learned IX Addl.
District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural
District, at Bengaluru in SC.NO.208/2023, for the
alleged offences p/u/s 306,504,506 r/w 34 of IPC;
b) Quash the entire charge sheet and all other
further proceedings pending before the Learned IX
Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural
District, at Bengaluru in SC.No.208/2023, for the
alleged offences p/u/s 306,504,506 r/w 34 of IPC .
.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
2. Petitioner in Crl.P.No. 8639/2023 is before this court
seeking for the following reliefs :
a) Quash the charge sheet filed against the
petitioner in S.C.No.208/2023 on the file of IX
Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru arising out
of Cr.No.31/2022 of Nelamangala Town Police,
Bengaluru for the offence p/u/s 306, 504, 506
r/w 34 of IPC, by allowing this petition;
3. Petitioner in Crl.P.No. 3948/2024 is before this court
seeking for the following reliefs :
a) Quash the charge sheet filed against the
petitioner in S.C.No.208/2023 on the file of IX
Addl. District Judge at Bangalore Rural District,
Bangalore, arising out of Cr.No.31/2022 of
Nelamangala Town Police, Bangalore for the
offence p/u/s 306, 504, 506 r/w 34 of IPC, by
allowing this petition;
4. Respondent No. 2 lodged a complaint before
Nelamangala Police Station on 24.02.2022, on the
basis of which Crime No. 31/2022 came to be
registered for the offences punishable under Sections
306, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Upon completion of the
investigation, a charge sheet came to be filed on
14.04.2024 for the aforesaid offences. Challenging
the said proceedings, the petitioners are before this
Court in their respective criminal petitions.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
5. The case of the complainant, as set out in the
complaint lodged by respondent No. 2, is that on
14.02.2022, he had borrowed a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- from Chennakeshava, who is the
petitioner in Criminal Petition No. 3948/2024, in
connection with a factory business. It is alleged that,
subsequently, Chennakeshava started demanding
repayment of the amount on the ground that certain
representations made by the complainant were
incorrect. The complainant is stated to have sought
some time to repay the amount, but the same was
not acceded to by Chennakeshava.
6. It is further alleged that Chennakeshava,
accompanied by Beeresha, who is the petitioner in
Criminal Petition No. 981/2025, visited the
complainant's house and repeatedly demanded
repayment of the money. On such occasions, they
allegedly threatened that, if the amount was not
repaid, the complainant, his wife and his son would
be killed. It is also alleged that the complainant's son
was specifically threatened with death, with the
accused stating that he would be finished off while
travelling to school if the amount was not paid.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
7. The complaint further alleges that on 24.02.2022,
Chennakeshava, Beeresha and Shashikala, also
referred to as Shashi, who is the petitioner in
Criminal Petition No. 8639/2023, came to the
complainant's house and again threatened the
complainant, his wife and his son with dire
consequences in the event of non-payment of the
amount.
8. According to the complainant, the continuous
harassment and threats meted out by the aforesaid
persons caused severe distress to his wife, who
ultimately committed suicide. It is on the basis of
these allegations that the aforesaid offences came to
be registered. The investigating agency thereafter
recorded the statements of witnesses, collected the
material available in relation to the incident and filed
the charge sheet on 14.04.2024.
9. Sri Raju C.N., learned counsel appearing for
Shashikala, makes the following submissions:
9.1. The name of Shashikala was not originally
mentioned in the complaint lodged by
respondent No. 2. It is contended that her
name was subsequently inserted by way of an
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
alleged overwriting, thereby casting doubt on
the veracity of the allegations made against
her.
9.2. It is further submitted that Shashikala is a
Government servant and that she had never
visited the complainant's house. Learned
counsel draws attention to the statement of the
complainant's son and submits that even in the
said statement, there is no reference to
Shashikala having visited the house or having
threatened the deceased or her son. On these
grounds, it is contended that the allegations
against Shashikala are unsustainable and that
the proceedings, insofar as she is concerned,
are liable to be quashed.
9.3. Sri Raju C.N. also appears for Chennakeshava.
His submission is that the demand for
repayment of a loan, by itself, cannot constitute
sufficient ground to conclude that the deceased
committed suicide on account of harassment
attributable to Chennakeshava. It is contended
that the existence of a monetary dispute and
the demand for repayment thereof cannot,
without further material establishing the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
requisite ingredients of the alleged offences,
sustain the criminal proceedings.
10. Sri I.S. Pramod Chandra, learned counsel appearing
for Beeresha in Criminal Petition No. 981/2025,
submits that Beeresha had no independent role in
the transaction between the complainant and
Chennakeshava. According to learned counsel,
Beeresha had merely accompanied Chennakeshava
and had no concern with the monetary dealings
between the parties. It is further contended that
Beeresha was not present at the place of occurrence
on several of the dates alleged in the complaint. On
these grounds, learned counsel submits that the
proceedings against Beeresha are liable to be
quashed in their entirety.
11. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent
No. 2 submits that the deceased was subjected to
continuous harassment and threats by
Chennakeshava, Beeresha and Shashikala in
connection with the demand for repayment of the
amount. It is contended that the harassment was not
confined to a mere demand for repayment but was
accompanied by threats to the lives of the
complainant, his wife and his son. According to
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
learned counsel, it was the cumulative effect of such
harassment and threats that drove the deceased to
commit suicide.
12. Learned counsel further submits that the statements
of witnesses recorded during the course of
investigation support the allegations concerning the
threats and harassment. It is contended that, in view
of the material collected during investigation and the
filing of the charge sheet, the matter requires a full-
fledged trial and that no ground is made out for
quashing the proceedings at this stage.
13. The learned High Court Government Pleader had, on
an earlier occasion, sought time on the ground that
the death note allegedly written by the deceased had
been forwarded to the Forensic Science Laboratory
(FSL) for examination. Today, placing reliance on the
report received from the Director of the FSL, the
learned High Court Government Pleader submits that
the handwriting expert has categorically opined that
the handwriting appearing on the death note is that
of the deceased.
14. It is further submitted that the deceased has referred
to and blamed Chennakeshava in the said death
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
note. According to the learned High Court
Government Pleader, the contents of the death note,
read together with the statements of witnesses and
the other material collected during investigation,
furnish sufficient material to warrant continuation of
the proceedings, particularly in respect of the offence
punishable under Section 306 of the IPC, against
Chennakeshava.
15. Heard Sri.I.S.Promod Chandra, learned counsel for
petitioner in Crl.P. No.981/2025, Sri.Raju.C.N,
learned counsel for petitioner No.8639/2023 and
3948/2024, Smt.Rashmi Patel, learned HCGP for
respondent No.1 and Sri.K.Narasegowda, learned
counsel for respondent No.2 in all the matters.
Perused papers.
16. The offences alleged against the petitioners in the
FIR and the charge sheet are punishable under
Sections 306, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to
as “the IPC”). Section 306 of the IPC reads as
follows:
306. Abetment of suicide.—
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission
of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years, and
shall also be liable to fine.
17. The essential question for consideration is whether
the material collected during the investigation
discloses the commission of the offence of abetment
of suicide punishable under Section 306 of the IPC.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a catena of decisions,
has held that a mere demand for repayment of
money advanced by way of a loan would not, by
itself, constitute abetment of suicide. In this regard,
learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance on
the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Mahendra Awase v. State of Madhya Pradesh ,
(2025) 4 SCC 801, particularly paragraphs 12, 16
and 19 to 25 thereof, which read as follows:
“12. As is clear from the plain language of the sections to
attract the ingredient of Section 306, the accused should have
abetted the commission of a suicide. A person abets the doing
of a thing who Firstly — instigates any person to do that thing
or Secondly — engages with one or more other person or
persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act
or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy,
and in order to the doing of that thing or Thirdly —
intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of
that thing.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
16. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306
IPC there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of
the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the
commission of suicide must have played an active role by an
act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the
commission of suicide. Therefore, the act of abetment by the
person charged with the said offence must be proved and
established by the prosecution before he could be convicted
under Section 306 IPC.
19. As has been held hereinabove, to satisfy the requirement
of instigation the accused by his act or omission or by a
continued course of conduct should have created such
circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option
except to commit suicide. It was also held that a word uttered
in a fit of anger and emotion without intending the
consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be
instigation.
20. Applying the above principle to the facts of the present
case, we are convinced that there are no grounds to frame
charges under Section 306 IPC against the appellant. This is so
even if we take the prosecution's case on a demurrer and at its
highest. A reading of the suicide note reveals that the
appellant was asking the deceased to repay the loan
guaranteed by the deceased and advanced to Ritesh Malakar.
21. It could not be said that the appellant by performing his
duty of realising outstanding loans at the behest of his
employer can be said to have instigated the deceased to
commit suicide. Equally so, with the transcripts, including the
portions emphasised hereinabove. Even taken literally, it could
not be said that the appellant intended to instigate the
commission of suicide.
22. It could certainly not be said that the appellant by his acts
created circumstances which left the deceased with no other
option except to commit suicide. Viewed from the armchair of
the appellant, the exchanges with the deceased, albeit heated,
are not with intent to leave the deceased with no other option
but to commit suicide. This is the conclusion we draw taking a
realistic approach, keeping the context and the situation in
mind. Strangely, the FIR has also been lodged after a delay of
two months and twenty days.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
23. This Court has, over the last several decades, repeatedly
reiterated the higher threshold, mandated by law for Section
306 IPC (Now Section 108 read with Section 45 of the Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023) to be attracted. They however seem to have
followed more in the breach. Section 306 IPC appears to be
casually and too readily resorted to by the police. While the
persons involved in genuine cases where the threshold is met
should not be spared, the provision should not be deployed
against individuals, only to assuage the immediate feelings of
the distraught family of the deceased.
24. The conduct of the proposed accused and the deceased,
their interactions and conversations preceding the unfortunate
death of the deceased should be approached from a practical
point of view and not divorced from day-to-day realities of life.
Hyperboles employed in exchanges should not, without
anything more, be glorified as an instigation to commit suicide.
It is time the investigating agencies are sensitised to the law
laid down by this Court under Section 306 so that persons are
not subjected to the abuse of process of a totally untenable
prosecution. The trial courts also should exercise great caution
and circumspection and should not adopt a play it safe
syndrome by mechanically framing charges, even if the
investigating agencies in a given case have shown utter
disregard for the ingredients of Section 306.
25. For the above reasons, we hold that the case against the
appellant is groundless for framing of a charge under Section
306. Hence, we discharge the appellant from proceedings in
Sessions Case No. 19 of 2023 pending on the file of the First
Additional Sessions Judge, Khargone District, Mandleshwar and
quash and set aside the said proceedings. The appeal is
allowed and the impugned order dated 25-7-2023 passed by
the High Court in Mahendra Awase v. State of M.P. is set
aside.”
18. Relying on Mahendra Awase , learned counsel for
the petitioners submits that, to attract Section 306 of
the IPC, the prosecution must establish abetment
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
within the meaning of Section 107 of the IPC. Such
abetment may take the form of instigation,
engagement in a conspiracy accompanied by an act
or illegal omission in pursuance thereof, or
intentional aid by an act or illegal omission. It is
therefore contended that the mere existence of a
dispute or the making of a demand for repayment of
a loan, even if accompanied by heated exchanges,
would not, in the absence of the requisite ingredients
of abetment, constitute an offence under Section 306
of the IPC.
19. Applying the principles laid down by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Mahendra Awase , this Court is
required to examine whether the allegations and the
material collected during the investigation disclose
the requisite ingredients of abetment of suicide. In
the present case, the principal allegations against
Channakeshava and Beeresha are that they
demanded repayment of the loan advanced to the
complainant and threatened the complainant and his
family members with dire consequences in the event
of non-payment. The allegations include threats to
take the lives of the complainant and his family
members. However, there is no specific allegation
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
that either of these petitioners instigated the
deceased to commit suicide or intentionally aided her
in doing so. The alleged threats, as set out in the
material placed before this Court, were made in the
context of the demand for repayment of the loan and
were directed principally against the complainant and
his family members. On the material presently
available, the requisite nexus between the alleged
conduct of these petitioners and the commission of
suicide, so as to constitute abetment within the
meaning of Section 107 read with Section 306 of the
IPC, is not made out. Consequently, the continuation
of the prosecution against them for the offence
punishable under Section 306 of the IPC would not
be justified.
20. Insofar as the offences punishable under Sections
504 and 506 of the IPC are concerned, the relevant
provisions read as follows:
504. Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of
the peace.—
Whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to
any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such
provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to
commit any other offence, shall be punished with
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
506. Punishment for criminal intimidation.—
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.
If the threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.—And if
the threat be 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.
21. A perusal of the material collected during the
investigation indicates that Channakeshava and
Beeresha allegedly visited the complainant’s
residence and threatened the complainant’s wife and
his son in connection with the demand for repayment
of the loan. The allegations include threats to cause
death or bodily harm. At this stage, this Court is not
required to undertake a detailed appreciation of the
evidence or determine whether the allegations will
ultimately be proved. The material, taken at face
value, discloses allegations that warrant
consideration at trial in relation to the offences
punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC.
Accordingly, no ground is made out for quashing the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 18 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
proceedings against Channakeshava and Beeresha in
their entirety. The prosecution in respect of these
offences shall proceed in accordance with law.
22. The case of Smt. Shashikala, petitioner in Criminal
Petition No. 8639 of 2023, stands on a different
footing. A perusal of the handwritten complaint, as
placed before this Court, indicates that her name was
inserted subsequently. Further, the statement of the
complainant’s son does not refer to her presence at
the complainant’s residence during the alleged
incidents on 23.02.2022 or 24.02.2022, or at any
earlier point in time. Nor does the material referred
to before this Court attribute any specific act of
threat, insult or harassment to her. The allegations
and the supporting material, as presently available,
are directed principally against Channakeshava and
Beeresha, and no witness has been identified as
having spoken to Shashikala’s presence at the
relevant place or her participation in the alleged
incidents.
23. The mere inclusion of a person’s name in the charge
sheet cannot, in the absence of supporting material
indicating that person’s involvement, justify
subjecting that person to a criminal trial. In the
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 19 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
present case, the apparent subsequent insertion of
Shashikala’s name in the complaint, coupled with the
absence of any specific allegation against her in the
statement of the complainant’s son and the absence
of other identified material establishing her
participation, renders the case against her materially
distinguishable from that against the other
petitioners. In these circumstances, continuation of
the criminal proceedings against Shashikala would
amount to an abuse of the process of law. Her
petition, therefore, deserves to be allowed.
24. For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the
following
ORDER
(i) Criminal Petition No. 8639 of 2023, filed by
Smt. Shashikala, is allowed. The proceedings in
Crime No. 31 of 2022, culminating in the
charge sheet dated 14.04.2024, are quashed
insofar as they relate to her.
(ii) Criminal Petition No. 3948 of 2024, filed by
Channakeshava, and Criminal Petition No. 981
of 2025, filed by Beeresha, are allowed in part.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
- 20 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:56968
CRL.P No. 981 of 2025
C/W CRL.P No. 8639 of 2023
CRL.P No. 3948 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010751322024
The proceedings against them for the offence
punishable under Section 306 of the IPC are
quashed.
(iii) The proceedings against Channakeshava and
Beeresha for the offences punishable under
Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC shall continue
in accordance with law.
(iv) The observations made in this order are
confined to the consideration of the present
petitions and shall not influence the trial Court
in its independent assessment of the evidence
or the merits of the surviving charges.
Digitally Signed By:
SURAJ GOVINDA RAJ
17/10/2026, 13:18, Bengaluru
Verified
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
JUDGE
LN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19