SRI SHIVA KUMAR vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU



TH
DATED THIS THE 14 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

BEFORE


THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.7917 OF 2020

BETWEEN:


1. SRI SHIVA KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
S/O SRINIVAS
1-2 LINGARAJAPURA GRAMATHANA
BANGALORE NORTH
THOMAS TOWN
BENGALURU-560084

2. SRI SYED AFSAR PASHA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/O SYED MUSTHAQ SHA
ST
NO.23/1, 1 CROSS
KAVERINAGAR
R T NAGAR POST
BENGALURU-560032

3. SRI DILIP KUMAR M
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
S/O MUNISWAMY
NO.17, HALEOORU VEERANNAPALYA
ARABIC COLLEGE POST
BENGALURU-560045
[DELETED V/O DT.21.11.2022]

4. SRI T RAMESH
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
S/O THIMMAYYA








Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


NO.35, GOVINDAPURA
NEAR SAMUDHAYA BHAVAN
ARABIC COLLEGE POST
BENGALURU-560045

5. SRI PURUSHOTHAM
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
S/O M RAMAIAH
TH
NO.154, 4 CROSS
NAGAVAR
ARABIC COLLEGE POST
BENGALURU-560045

…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SIDDHARTH SUMAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KADUGONDANAHALLI POLICE STATION
BENGALURU-560001
REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU
REP BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING

2. SMT. RAJESHWARAMMA
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
W/O LATE RAJANNACHAR
NO.506, RENUKA TEMPLE ROAD
NAGAWARA
ARABIC COLLEGE POST
BENGALURU-560045

…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUHAS GOWDA M, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI BALASUBRAMANYA B N, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO
QUASH THE FIR (I.E ANNEXURE-A) REGISTERED BY THE
KADUGONDANAHALLI P.S., AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN
CR.NO.387/2020 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 143, 147, 447, 427,
504, 506, 149 OF IPC AS WELL AS UNDER SEC 3(1)(F), 3(1)(R)
AND 3(1)(S) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT AND ALL FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS THEREON PURSUANT TO THE COMPLAINT OF
ND
THE 2 RESPONDENT AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed praying this Court to quash the FIR
registered against the petitioners in Cr.No.387/2020 for the
offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 447, 427, 504,
506 and 149 of IPC as well as under Sections 3(1)(f), 3(1)(r)
and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and all further proceedings
nd
thereon pursuant to the complaint of the 2 respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader
appearing for the State. The counsel for respondent No.2 is
absent.

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


3. The factual matrix of the case that based on the
complaint dated 08.12.2020, the police have registered the
case in Crime No.387/2020 invoking the aforesaid offences.
When this complaint was given to the ADGP, matter was
referred to the ACP and ACP in turn, referred the matter to the
Investigating Officer and Investigating Officer gave the report
in terms of Annexure-L wherein complainant had made the
statement that she has not signed the said complaint. Inspite
of the said report dated 25.11.2020 as per Annexure-L, the
case was registered on 08.12.2020 by registering the FIR in
Crime No.387/2020 and this complaint is subsequent to the
report dated 25.11.2020 and police have entertained the same
invoking the aforesaid offences.
4. Petitioner No.3 is deleted and this petition is only on
behalf of accused Nos.1, 3, 5 and 6. The counsel for the
petitioners would vehemently contend that the complaint and
the FIR are nothing but a misuse of the powers by the
Investigating Officer as well as the complainant. The
complainant had lodged the complaint even after the report
dated 25.11.2020 and the same was entertained by the

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


Investigating Officer. The counsel would vehemently contend
that when the suit was filed by the complainant and relief was
granted and immediately petitioners have appeared before the
court and filed an application for vacating the stay and the
order of stay was vacated and thereafter, the complainant has
approached this court in MFA and this court also did not
entertain the MFA and the said order was also challenged
before the Apex Court and Apex Court also dismissed the same
on 05.03.2019 and subsequently, suit was also dismissed on
03.01.2020. But subsequently this complaint is filed with an
intention to harass the petitioners.
5. The counsel also brought to notice of this court the
contents of the complaint wherein only an allegation is made
that in order to knock off the property, made the trespass in
respect of the suit schedule property and caused the damage
and gave life threat. The counsel would vehemently contend
that when the property was sold by the complainant on
04.08.2003, the same was suppressed and subsequently, even
executed a GPA in favour of the third party in 2009 and so also
even entered into an agreement of sale on 09.08.2017. Thus,

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


the Court has to take note of the very conduct of the
complainant. The counsel would contend that when the
property was sold, the question of invoking the offences based
on the false complaint does not arise and the same is nothing
but an abuse of process which leads to miscarriage of justice.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for
respondent No.2 would submits that specific allegations are
made in the FIR. Hence, the matter requires to be investigated
and this Court cannot quash the FIR when the specific
allegations are made in the complaint.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the State also
submits that the truth will unearth if investigation is conducted.
8. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
respective parties and also on perusal of the material on
record, it discloses that the counsel for the petitioners mainly
relies upon the documents in order to substantiate his
contentions viz., Annexure-C i.e., plaint in O.S.No.4789/2018
filed by the complainant; the copy of the order of the trial court
while vacating the interim order granted in favour of the

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


complainant at Annexure-D dated 31.08.2018; the order
passed by this Court in MFA No.7383/2018 vide order dated
16.01.2019 as per Annexure-E and the copy of the order dated
05.03.2019 passed by the Apex Court in SLP No.5483/2019
dated 05.03.2019 dismissing the appeal which was arising out
of MFA No7383/2018 at Annexure-F. The counsel also brought
to notice of this Court the sale deed executed by the
complainant vide sale deed dated 04.08.2003 as per Annexure-
G and so also GPA dated 17.03.2009 as per Annexure-H; also
the document of Sale Agreement dated 09.08.2017 at
Annexure- J1. The counsel would vehemently contend that
even though property was sold long back in 2003, the very
complainant had indulged in such act.
9. The counsel also brought to notice of this court that
when the complaint was given to the ADGP, the Police
Inspector of KG Halli given the report as per Annexure-L dated
25.11.2020 wherein the complainant even denied the very
same complaint stating that no such complaint was given to the
ADGP. But subsequently, this complaint is filed before the
police and the same is entertained by the police.

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


10. Having considered all these materials available
before the Court, it discloses that when the complainant was
unsuccessful throughout i.e., from the Trial Court to the highest
court of the Apex Court. The documents disclose that sale deed
was of the year 2003 and subsequently, the complainant had
indulged in execution of General Power of Attorney and Sale
Agreement in favour of the third parties. Thus, it is a clear case
of abuse of process that too making an allegations against the
petitioners since the very complaint itself does not disclose any
committing of an offence. If this Court fails to exercise the
powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., it will leads to miscarriage
of justice having considered all these documents which have
been annexed along with the petition. Hence, it is a clear
classic case of an abuse of process at the instance of the
complainant and the same is also entertained by the
Investigating Officer.
11. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the
following:

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58162
CRL.P No. 7917 of 2020


CNR: KAHC010401262020


ORDER
The petition is allowed.
The FIR registered against the petitioners in
Cr.No.387/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections
143, 147, 447, 427, 504, 506 and 149 of IPC as well as under
Sections 3(1)(f), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act
and all further proceedings thereon pursuant to the complaint
nd
of the 2 respondent is hereby quashed.

Sd/-
(H.P.SANDESH)
JUDGE



SN