SHRI ANNASAHEB APPA ADADANDE vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103777 OF 2023
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI ANNASAHEB APPA ADADANDE
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE,
RESIDING OF: SIDNAL,
TALUK: NIPPANI, BELAGAVI DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 591 211.
2. SHRI AMAR ANNASAHEB ADADANDE
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: SERVICE,
RESIDING OF: SIDNAL,
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD
TALUK: NIPPANI, BELAGAVI DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 591 211.
3. AKASH ANNASAHEB ADADANDE
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
OCCUPATION: SERVICE,
RESIDING OF: SIDNAL,
TALUK: NIPPANI, BELAGAVI DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 591 211.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARAD M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD,
THROUGH NIPPANI RURAL P.S.
2. SHRI BHARAT APPAL ADADANDE
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE,
RESIDING OF: SIDNAL,
TALUK: NIPPANI,
BELAGAVI DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 591 211.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. MAHANTESH S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST
PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1-3 IN C.C.NO.3017/2023
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC NIPPANI IN CRIME NO.131/2023 IN NIPPANI RURAL P.S.
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 325,
341, 504, 506, READ WITH 34 OF IPC IN CR.NO.131/2023 TO
MEET ENDS OF JUSTICE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR REPORTING
SETTLEMENT, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that accused
No.1 died on 23.03.2025 and hence, the case against accused
No.1 stood abated vide order dated 27.08.2026. Memo is filed
to that effect. The same is taken on record.
Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are present. Respondent No.2-de
facto complainant is also present.
2. The petitioners have filed this petition under section
482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the entire proceedings in
C.C.No.3017/2023, in connection with Crime No. 131/2023 of
Nippani rural P.S. pending on the file of learned Principal Civil
Judge and JMFC Court, Nipani, Belagavi District, registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325, 341, 504,
506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
3. In view of the settlement arrived at between the
parties, today both the parties have filed IA 1 of 2026, under
section 359(1) read with section 528 of BNSS 2023, for
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
compounding of the offences alleged. The IA is filed by both the
parties, signed by them and their respective counsels. Learned
HCGP, the de-facto complainant, petitioners/accused Nos.2 and
3 and their respective counsels are present. The contents of the
application and affidavits read as follows:-
COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER SECTION
359(1) R/W 528 OF CODE OF BHARATIYA
NAGARIK SANHITA, 2023
The Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 respectfully
submits as under,
1. It is submitted that, the Respondent No. 2 had
filed the filed the Complaint against the petitioner
before the Nippani Rural Police Station in Crime No,
131/2023 for the offence U/s, 323, 341, 504, 506,
R/w, 34 IPC.
2. In the above said matter, Both the parties have
settled the matter amicably, with the intervention of
elders of both the parties, who came forward to
settle the matter amicably. Therefore, both the
parties are before this Hon'ble Court to request for
the recording of the settlement of the matter and
seek the intervention of this Court, by quashing the
proceedings in the ends of justice and equity.
3. Wherefore, the Petitioner and the Respondent No.
2 jointly pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
to record the compromise as settled between the
parties and quash any further proceedings as against
the Petitioner, in C C Case No, 89/24 for the offence
U/s,323, 341, 504, 506, R/w, 34 IPC. pending on the
file of Prl Civil Judge and jmfc Nipani to meet the
ends of justice.
AFFIDAVIT
Herein, Amar S/o AnnasahebAdadande Age, 35
years, Occ; Service R/o, SindnalTq, Nippani, Dist,
Belagavi today at Dharwad do, Herby Solemnly
affirm and State on oath as under:
1. It is submitted that, the petitioner will not fight
with the respondent in the future and that, they will
not make any allegation against the respondent.
further in the presence of elders the matter is
settled.
2. It is stated that there is no pressure or compulsion
or coercion of any sort in coming to the above
conclusion and settling the matter and getting it
quashed as prayer for this petition. Hence, this
affidavit.
What is stated hereinabove is true to the best of
my knowledge, information and beliefs and contents
of the above affidavit as well as Compromise Petition
is read over to me in the language known to me and
I understand it to be true and correct and signed.
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
AFFIDAVIT
Herein, Akash S/o, Annasaheb Adadande, Age,
30 years, Occ; Agriculture R/o, Nandikurli Umarani
Taluka Chokodi, Dist, Belagavi today at Dharwad do,
Herby Solemnly affirm and State on oath as under:
1 It is submitted that, the petitioner will not flight
with the respondent in the future and that, they will
not make any allegation against respondent. Further
in the presence of elders the matter is settled.
2. It is stated that there is no pressure of compulsion
or coercion of any sort in coming to the above
conclusion and settling the matter and getting it
quashed as prayer for this petition. Hence, this
affidavit.
What is stated hereinabove is true to the best of
my knowledge, information and beliefs and contents
of the above affidavit as well as Compromise Petition
is read over to me in the language known to me and
I understand it to be true and correct and signed.
AFFIDAVIT
Herein, Bharat S/o, Appa Adadande, Age, 56 years,
Occ; Agriculture R/o, Sidnal, Tq, Nippani, Dist,
Belagavi, today at Dharwad do, Herby Solemnly
affirm and State on oath as under:
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
1 It is submitted that, the petitioner will not fight
with the respondent in the future and that, they will
not make any allegation against the respondent,
further in the presence of elders the matter is
settled.
2 It is stated that there is no pressure or compulsion
or coercion of any sort in coming to the above
conclusion and settling the matter and getting it
quashed as prayer for this petition. Hence, this
affidavit.
What is stated hereinabove is true to the best of my
knowledge, information and beliefs and contents of
the above affidavit as well as Compromise Petition is
read over to me in the language known to me and I
understand it to be true and correct and signed.
4. Perused the charge sheet material, complaint, FIR and
IA. The allegations made in the complaint shows that there was
a dispute between the complainant and the accused, and same
is settled as per the advice of the elders of both the family
without any coercion or coercion. Therefore, continuation of the
proceedings against the petitioners is not at all necessary, and
that would be nothing but abuse of process of law. Since the
alleged offences are non-compoundable in nature, the accused
and the de facto complainant pray to quash the proceedings
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
and permit to compound the offences. As the matter is settled
between the parties, it is just and necessary to invoke section
482 Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceedings.
5. Since the parties have settled the matter between
themselves, the chances of conviction is very remote, and
therefore, it would be unnecessary to drag the proceedings.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Narinder
Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr reported in (2014) 6
SCC 466 at Para Nos.31 to 35 has held as under:
"31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up
and lay down the following principles by which the
High Court would be guided in giving adequate
treatment to the settlement between the parties and
exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code
while accepting the settlement and quashing the
proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with
direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
(I) Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is
to be distinguished from the power which lies in the
Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of
the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code,
the High Court has inherent power to quash the
criminal proceedings even in those cases which are
not compoundable, where the parties have settled
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
the matter between themselves. However, this power
is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
(II) When the parties have reached the settlement
and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal
proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases
would be to secure:
(i) ends of justice, or
(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.
While exercising the power the High Court is to form
an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.
(III) Such a power is not be exercised in those
prosecutions which involve heinous and serious
offences of mental depravity or offences like murder,
rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in
nature and have a serious impact on society.
Similarly, for offences alleged to have been
committed under special statute like the Prevention
of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public
Servants while working in that capacity are not to be
quashed merely on the basis of compromise between
the victim and the offender.
(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having
overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character,
particularly those arising out of commercial
transactions or arising out of matrimonial
relationship or family disputes should be quashed
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
when the parties have resolved their entire disputes
among themselves.
(V) While exercising its powers, the High Court is to
examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is
remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases
would put the accused to great oppression and
prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to
him by not quashing the criminal cases.
(VI) Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the
category of heinous and serious offences and
therefore is to be generally treated as crime against
the society and not against the individual alone.
However, the High Court would not rest its decision
merely because there is a mention of Section 307
IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this
provision. It would be open to the High Court to
examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307
IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has
collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would
lead to proving the charge under Section 307 IPC.
For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court
to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such
injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the
body, nature of weapons used etc. Medical report in
respect of injuries suffered by the victim can
generally be the guiding factor. On the basis of this
prima facie analysis, the High Court can examine as
to whether there is a strong possibility of conviction
or the chances of conviction are remote and bleak. In
the former case it can refuse to accept the
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
settlement and quash the criminal proceedings
whereas in the later case it would be permissible for
the High Court to accept the plea compounding the
offence based on complete settlement between the
parties. At this stage, the Court can also be swayed
by the fact that the settlement between the parties is
going to result in harmony between them which may
improve their future relationship.
(VII) While deciding whether to exercise its power
under Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of
settlement play a crucial role. Those cases where the
settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged
commission of offence and the matter is still under
investigation, the High Court may be liberal in
accepting the settlement to quash the criminal
proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason
that at this stage the investigation is still on and
even the charge sheet has not been filed. Likewise,
those cases where the charge is framed but the
evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at
infancy stage, the High Court can show benevolence
in exercising its powers favourably, but after prima
facie assessment of the circumstances/material
mentioned above. On the other hand, where the
prosecution evidence is almost complete or after the
conclusion of the evidence the matter is at the stage
of argument, normally the High Court should refrain
from exercising its power under Section 482 of the
Code, as in such cases the trial court would be in a
position to decide the case finally on merits and to
come a conclusion as to whether the offence under
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
Section 307 IPC is committed or not. Similarly, in
those cases where the conviction is already recorded
by the trial court and the matter is at the appellate
stage before the High Court, mere compromise
between the parties would not be a ground to accept
the same resulting in acquittal of the offender who
has already been convicted by the trial court. Here
charge is proved under Section 307 IPC and
conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime
and, therefore, there is no question of sparing a
convict found guilty of such a crime.
32. After having clarified the legal position in the
manner aforesaid, we proceed to discuss the case at
hand.
33. In the present case, FIR No.121 dated 14.7.2010
was registered under Sections 307, 324, 323, 34
IPC. Investigation was completed, whereafter challan
was presented in the court against the petitioner
herein. Charges have also been framed; the case is
at the stage of recording of evidence. At this
juncture, parties entered into compromise on the
basis of which petition under Section 482 of the Code
was filed by the petitioners namely the accused
persons for quashing of the criminal proceedings
under the said FIR. As per the copy of the settlement
which was annexed along with the petition, the
compromise took place between the parties on
12.7.2013 when respectable members of the Gram
Panchayat held a meeting under the Chairmanship of
Sarpanch. It is stated that on the intervention of the
- 13 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
said persons/Panchayat, both the parties were
agreed for compromise and have also decided to live
with peace in future with each other. It was argued
that since the parties have decided to keep harmony
between the parties so that in future they are able to
live with peace and love and they are the residents
of the same village, the High Court should have
accepted the said compromise and quash the
proceedings.
34. We find from the impugned order that the sole
reason which weighed with the High Court in refusing
to accept the settlement between the parties was the
nature of injuries. If we go by that factor alone,
normally we would tend to agree with the High
Court's approach. However, as pointed out
hereinafter, some other attendant and inseparable
circumstances also need to be kept in mind which
compel us to take a different view.
35. We have gone through the FIR as well which was
recorded on the basis of statement of the
complainant/victim. It gives an indication that the
complainant was attacked allegedly by the accused
persons because of some previous dispute between
the parties, though nature of dispute etc. is not
stated in detail. However, a very pertinent statement
appears on record viz., "respectable persons have
been trying for a compromise up till now, which
could not be finalized". This becomes an important
aspect. It appears that there have been some
disputes which led to the aforesaid purported attack
- 14 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
by the accused on the complainant. In this context
when we find that the elders of the village, including
Sarpanch, intervened in the matter and the parties
have not only buried their hatchet but have decided
to live peacefully in future, this becomes an
important consideration. The evidence is yet to be
led in the Court. It has not even started. In view of
compromise between parties, there is a minimal
chance of the witnesses coming forward in support of
the prosecution case. Even though nature of injuries
can still be established by producing the doctor as
witness who conducted medical examination, it may
become difficult to prove as to who caused these
injuries. The chances of conviction, therefore, appear
to be remote. It would, therefore, be unnecessary to
drag these proceedings. We, taking all these factors
into consideration cumulatively, are of the opinion
that the compromise between the parties be
accepted and the criminal proceedings arising out of
FIR No.121 dated 14.7.2010 registered with Police
Station LOPOKE, District Amritsar Rural be quashed.
We order accordingly."
7. On perusal of the aforesaid decision, facts and
circumstances and the material available on record, it appears
that respondent No.2 had filed the case against the petitioners
alleging that while he and his son were standing, his brother
i.e., petitioner No.1 and his sons viz., petitioner Nos.2 and 3
warned the complainant that he shall not have any share in the
- 15 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
water resource drawn from the ancestral well. Thereafter, it is
alleged that the petitioners followed respondent No.2
complainant and his son and assaulted them with their hands
and threatened them with dire consequences that if the well
water is used by them, they and their life shall not be spared.
Now that the petitioners and the respondent No.2 defacto
complainant being close relatives and residents of same village,
with the intervention of village elders and in order to maintain
peace and harmony in the village, respondent No.2/de-facto
complainant is intending to take back the case registered
against the petitioners. In this context, the Court finds that, the
parties have settled their disputes. This becomes an important
consideration. In view of the compromise held between the
parties, further investigation of the case would not arise and if
the investigation is completed and investigation officer has
been filed the chargesheet even at that juncture also, there is a
minimal chance of the witnesses coming forward in support of
the prosecution case. Thus, the chances of conviction,
therefore, appears to be very remote. It would, therefore, be
unnecessary to drag these proceedings. When the Court takes
- 16 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the Court is of
the opinion that the compromise between the parties be
accepted and the criminal proceedings initiated against the
petitioners/accused is liable to be quashed.
Hence, the compromise petition is accepted. In view of
settlement arrived at between the parties and in view of the
ratio laid down in the decision cited supra, it is necessary to
permit the parties to quash the proceedings against the
petitioners.
Accordingly, I proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER
1. The Criminal Petition is allowed .
2. The entire proceedings in C.C.No.3017/2023, in
connection with Crime No.131/2023 of Nippani rural
police Station pending on the file of learned
Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Nipani,
Belagavi District, for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 325, 341, 504, 506 read with 34 of
Indian Penal Code, against petitioner Nos.2 and 3 is
hereby quashed.
3. I.A. No. 1 of 2026 is allowed accordingly.
- 17 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC-D:17729
CRL.P No. 103777 of 2023
CNR: KAHC020211142023
Pending I.A.s, if any, stand disposed of as they do not
survive for consideration.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
MN /CT-SK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25