KARNATAKA PRADESH CONGRESS COMMITTEE vs BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY

- 1 -



Reserved on : 20.08.2026
Pronounced on : 04.11.2026



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 04 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026


BEFORE


THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA



CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9760 OF 2025

C/W

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9364 OF 2025



IN CRL.P No. 9760/2025

BETWEEN:

SIDDARAMAIAH
S/O LATE SIDDARAME GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF
SIDDARAMANAHUNDI VARUNA HOBALI
MYSURU - 570 010
MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
…PETITIONER





Digitally
signed by
PADMAVATHI
B K
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka

(BY SRI SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADVOCATE A/W
SRI S.A.AHMED, SRI SURYA MUKUNDARAJ L.,
SRI SANJAY YADAV B., AND
SMT.ANISHKA VAISHNAV, ADVOCATES)

- 2 -


AND:

BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY
NO.8, JAGANNATHA BHAVANA
TEMPLE STREET
TH
11 CROSS, MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU - 560 003
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE SECRETARY
BJP KARNATAKA
S.KESHAVA PRASAD
S/O LATE SIDDALINGAIAH SETTY
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI VINOD KUMAR M., ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482(FILED U/S.528 BNSS) CR.P.C
PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING AS AGAINST THE
PETITIONER ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.3 IN C.C.NO.7399/2024
(P.C.R NO.3878/2023) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 499
AND 500 OF IPC PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLII ADDL. CJM,
BENGALURU (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF CASES FILED
AGAINST SITTING AS WELL AS FORMER MP/MLA's TRIABLE BY
MAGISTRATE IN THE STATE OF KARNATAKA.
IN CRL.P NO. 9364/2025
BETWEEN:
1. KARNATAKA PRADESH CONGRESS COMMITTEE
C/O INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT
D.K.SHIVAKUMAR

- 3 -


CONGRESS BHAVAN
QUEENS ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 051.

2. D.K.SHIVAKUMAR
S/O LATE KEMPE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
TH
18 CROSS, UPPER PALACE ORCHADE
SADASHIVANAGAR
BENGALURU 560 080
MEMBER OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
KANAKAPURA
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY, SR.ADVOCATE A/W
SRI S.A.AHMED, SRI SURYA MUKUNDARAJ L.,
SRI SANJAY YADAV B., AND
SMT.ANISHKA VAISHNAV, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY
NO.48, JAGANNATHA BHAVANA
TEMPLE STREET
TH
11 CROSS, MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU - 560 003
REPRESENTED BY ITS
STATE SECRETARY
BJP KARNATAKA
S.KESHAVA PRASAD
S/O LATE SIDDALINGAIAHSETTY
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M., ADVOCATE)

- 4 -


THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH
THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER
ARRAIGNED AS ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 IN C.C.NO.7399/2024
(P.C.R NO.3878/2023) FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 499
AND 500 OF IPC, 1860 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLII
ADDL.CJM, BENGALURU (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRAIL OF CASES
FILED AGAINST SITTING AS WELL AS FORMER MP/MLAs,
TRIABLE BY MAGISTRATE IN THE STATE OF
KARNATAKA).I.A.NO.1/2025 FOR DISPENSATION.I.A.NO.1/2025
FILED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO
DISPENSE WITH THE PRODUCTION OF CERTIFIED COPY OF
ENTIRE ORDER SHEET FOR A PERIOD OF 4 WEEKS.,FOR THE
REASONS STATED THEREIN.I.A.NO.2/2025 FOR
STAY.I.A.NO.2/2025 FILED BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE
PETITIONER PRAYING TO STAY ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.7399/2024 (PCR NO.3878/2023) FOR THE ALLEGED
OFFENCES P/U/S 499 AND 500 OF IPC, 1860 PENDING ON THE
FILE OF THE XLII ADDL.CJM, BENGALURU (SPECIAL COURT FOR
TRAIL OF CASES FILED AGAINST SITTING AS WELL AS FORMER
MP/MLAs, TRIABLE BY MAGISTRATE IN THE STATE OF
KARNATAKA), IN SO FAR AS THIS PETITIONERS ARRAIGNED AS
ACCUSED NO.1 AND 2 ARE CONCERNED., FOR THE REASONS
STATED THEREIN.NOTE: THE COUNSEL HAS CHALLENGED THE
PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.7399/2024 FOR WHICH THE
DOWNLOADED COPY OF THE ORDER DTD 23.06.2025 IS FILED
INSTEAD OF CERTIFIED COPY AND FILED DISPENSATION TO
DISPENSE WITH THE PRODUCTION OF CERTIFIED COPY OF
ENTIRE ORDER SHEET.POST CRL.P BEFORE COURT FOR
ADMISSION A/W 1. I.A 1/2025 FOR DISPENSE WITH THE
PRODUCTION OF C.C OF ENTIRE ORDER SHEET A/W NOTE.2.
I.A 2/2025 FOR STAY.(MATTER PERTAINS TO MP/MLA
CASE)MD03.07.2025

- 5 -


THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 20.08.2026, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

The petitioners in Criminal Petition No.9364 of 2025 are
accused Nos. 1 and 2 and in the companion petition - Criminal
Petition No.9760 of 2025 - petitioner is accused No.3.

2. Heard in both the petitions Sri K. Shashi Kiran Shetty ,
learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Vinod
Kumar M. , learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -

The respondent/complainant is a political party. Accused
No.1/Karnataka Pradesh Congress Committee is said to have
published a derogatory advertisement in major newspapers like
Deccan Herald, Hindu, Times of India, Prajavani and Udayavani
regarding prices of various posts in the respondent/Complainant’s
Government in its tenure between 2019 and 2023. This was

- 6 -


published on 05-05-2023. A legal notice comes to be caused upon
the accused to tender unconditional apology on 06-05-2023. It was
ignored by the petitioners. On 09-05-2023, invoking Section 200 of
the CrPC, a complaint in P.C.R.No.3878 of 2023 is registered for
offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of the IPC. The
concerned Court takes cognizance of the said offence and
proceeded to issue summons for conduct of trial. It is at that stage
these two petitions are preferred seeking quashment of
proceedings.

4. The learned senior counsel Sri K. Shashi Kiran Shetty
appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that there
is violation of procedure under Section 199 of the CrPC, as there is
no sanction and the complainant is not an aggrieved person. He
would submit that identical issues are considered by the coordinate
Bench of this Court and the same would become applicable to the
cases at hand as well, as that was concerning accused No.4 and the
present petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel Sri Vinod Kumar M. ,
representing the respondent would vehemently refute the

- 7 -


submissions in contending that the very act of publication of an
advertisement with regard to corruption in the Government would
amount to defaming the Government. The Government, at that
time, was Bharatiya Janata Party and the Karnataka Pradesh
Congress Committee has published this advertisement. Therefore,
the matter must be tried. Insofar as quashment of proceedings
against accused No.4 is concerned, the learned counsel would
submit that merely because accused No.4’s case is quashed it
would not mean that accused Nos. 1 to 3 also should get away with
the proceedings.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.

7. The coordinate Bench was considering the case of accused
No.4 of the intention and involvement in publishing the
advertisement and whether the political party is a person
aggrieved. The issues that have fallen for consideration in the case
also are the same, ostensibly so, as what the coordinate Bench
considered was the case of accused No.4. Therefore, it would

- 8 -


suffice to notice the said judgment of the coordinate Bench in
1
RAHUL GANDHI v. BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY , wherein it is
held as follows:

“21. The procedural requirement of complaint being
brought before the Magistrate by “some person
aggrieved” would require the entity defamed in the
present case to bring the complaint. The complaint
broadly appears to make out a case that it is the party
that is the aggrieved person. The complainant seeks to make
out a case by asserting that the allegations made in the
advertisement at Exhibit-C series i.e., C2 to C6 makes an
imputation to the complainant.

22. Insofar as accused No. 4 and his role in publication of
the advertisement, a perusal of advertisement at Exhibit-C
series would indicate that except for the photograph of accused
No. 4 there is no other apparent nexus of accused No. 4 with
the advertisement.

23. In an action which seeks to fasten criminal
liability, it must be demonstrated that the imputation
made must be at the instance of a person who has mens
rea to defame. This legal requirement comes out from the
language of the provision as Section 499 of IPC stipulates
that the person who is stated to have committed the act
of defamation, must be a person “intending to harm or
knowing or having reason to believe”. In the absence of
any material to show that the advertisement was at the
instance of accused No. 4, the reliance on the
advertisement by itself could not lead to the assertion
that it was published by accused No. 4 with the requisite
intention to defame.

24. Accused No. 4 may have been a leader of the party
but did not hold any position in the organizational hierarchy as

1

2026 SCC Online KAR 779

- 9 -


on the relevant date as is made out by the memo dated
11.02.2025. In terms of the memo, it is specifically made out
that the accused No. 4 was neither the President nor the Vice
President of the Indian National Congress as on the date of
advertisement. A mere photograph on the advertisement would
not be sufficient to indicate that the advertisement was at the
instance of accused No. 4 when the legal provision stipulates
that the person must have requisite mens rea .

25. The position of the accused No. 4 is different and in
contradistinction to the other accused and their nexus to the
advertisement by virtue of their position and the contextual
background of the complaint.

26. It is however necessary to notice that the
complainant's complaint also refers to tweet of accused No. 4
wherein he is stated to have tweeted the advertisement along
with certain additional remarks. It is stated that the said tweet
in specific refers to BJP while forwarding the advertisement
which would tie down accused No. 4 as having defamed the
complainant. However, strangely the text of the said tweet has
not been marked along with other documents while sworn
statement was recorded nor any Section 65B certificate
produced in requisite format.

27. The trial Judge when taking cognizance has made
reference to documents at Exs.C.1 to C14 which does not
include the said tweet. If the order of the trial Judge issuing
process has been passed after applying his mind to the material
before him and such material in the form of tweet was not
marked as an exhibit, then what material would remain is only
the advertisement before the Court when order was passed
issuing summons. Sans the tweet, the advertisement by itself as
noticed above cannot lead to any presumption of accused No. 4
having defamed the complainant.

28. Insofar as the offence of defamation as regards
an entity, Explanation 2 to Section 499 of IPC does
indicate that there could be defamation of an entity such
as the company or an association or collection of persons.
Explanation 2 to Section 499 of IPC reads as follows:

- 10 -


“Explanation 2.— It may amount to
defamation to make an imputation concerning a
company or an association or collection of persons
as such.”

29. An imputation that ‘party X’ is corrupt, is by
itself defamatory and the entity which is alleged to be
corrupt could be the political party. However, where the
imputation made is against certain individuals or class of
persons in the entity, then the person aggrieved would be
such individuals or class of persons within the larger
entity who have been defamed.

30. Such legal exposition comes forth in the judgment of
6
the Apex Court in the case of S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal as
extracted below:

“26. ………….. Undoubtedly, the Explanation is
wide but in order to demonstrate the offence of
defamation, such a collection of persons must be
an identifiable body so that it is possible to say
with precision that a group of particular persons,
as distinguished from the rest of the community
stood defamed. In case the identity of the
collection of persons is not established so as to be
relatable to the defamatory words or imputations,
the complaint is not maintainable. In case a class
is mentioned, if such a class is indefinite, the
complaint cannot be entertained. Furthermore, if it
is not possible to ascertain the composition of
such a class, the criminal prosecution cannot
proceed .”

31. Where a functionary such an office bearer of the
party is defamed, then such functionary who would be
the aggrieved person. In the present case, the imputation
itself is by way of innuendo and such imputation is
sought to be stretched to the party. However, sans the
tweet the advertisement by itself makes no reference to
the party but rather makes an imputation to the
functionaries mentioned in the advertisement. The
reference that is made in the advertisement is to
constitutional functionaries and Government employees
being beneficiaries and to the irregularities in

- 11 -


Government Schemes. None of the persons or entities
referred to above are before this Court. Accordingly, the
aggrieved person in the advertisement at Exhibit-C series
factually cannot be the political party. ”



8. The afore-mentioned judgment is rendered in the case of
co-accused who did not face any separate allegations but similar
allegations and the issues are the same, as are projected in the
cases at hand. The Apex Court, in the judgment in SAJAL BOSE v.
2
STATE OF WEST BENGAL , has held as follows:
“…. …. ….
23. Keeping in view the aforesaid principles, it is
evident that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court
under Section 482 of CrPC is intended to be exercised,
inter alia , where the allegations made in the FIR, even if
taken at their face value, do not prima facie constitute
any offence, or where the uncontroverted allegations and
the material collected fail to disclose the commission of
an offence, or where the criminal proceeding is
manifestly attended with malafide and instituted with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance. The categories
illustratively enumerated in paragraph 102 of Bhajan Lal
(supra) serve as guiding principles to prevent abuse of
the process of law and to secure the ends of justice.
Tested on the anvil of these settled parameters, it becomes
necessary to examine whether the allegations in the present
case, read as they stand along with the material on record
including the CCTV footage, disclose the essential ingredients of
the offences alleged against the appellants, or whether the
continuation of proceedings qua them would amount to

2

2026 SCC OnLine SC 525

- 12 -


permitting the criminal process to be used as an instrument of
harassment.
…. …. ….

29. We are further constrained to note that by the very
same impugned judgment, and on the basis of the same set of
allegations arising out of the same FIR and chargesheet, the
High Court proceeded to quash the criminal proceedings against
two of the co-accused, while declining similar relief to the
appellants. The impugned judgment does not disclose any
cogent or discernible reasoning for drawing such a
distinction, particularly when the allegations stem from a
common incident and are founded on substantially similar
assertions. In the absence of a clear rationale justifying
differential treatment, the approach adopted by the High
Court is legally and factually unsustainable.
…. …. ….

31. In view of the foregoing discussion and upon a
cumulative consideration of the allegations in the FIR,
the material collected during investigation, and the
evidence placed before us, we are of the considered
opinion that the present case falls squarely within the
illustrative categories (1), (3) and (7) enumerated in
paragraph 102 of Bhajan Lal (supra). Even if the
allegations in the FIR and the material collected during
investigation are taken at their face value and accepted
in their entirety, they do not prima facie constitute the
necessary ingredients of offences alleged against the
appellants . Further, the uncontroverted material available
on record, to be specific, the CCTV footage, completely
belies the allegation of their participation in the alleged
offences so as to justify their being put to trial.
Additionally, the attendant circumstances, particularly
the admitted pre-existing disputes between the parties
and the absence of specific and distinct overt acts
attributed to the appellants, lend substance to their
contention that the criminal proceedings are manifestly
attended with malafide and have been initiated with an
ulterior motive. In such circumstances, permitting the
continuation of prosecution of the appellants would not
advance the cause of justice but would instead amount to
an abuse of the process of law.

- 13 -


32. Recently, this Court in Pradeep Kumar
11
Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh , revisited and
further elucidated the parameters governing the exercise
of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC. While
drawing guidance from earlier precedents, this Court
delineated a structured four-step test to assess the
sustainability of a prayer for quashing criminal
proceedings. The said decision underscores that where
the material relied upon by the accused is of sterling and
impeccable quality; is sufficient to negate the allegations
in the complaint; remains unrefuted or incapable of
justifiable refutation by the prosecution; and where
continuation of the proceedings would amount to an
abuse of the process of Court and not serve the ends of
justice, the High Court would be justified in exercising its
inherent powers to quash the proceedings . For ready
reference, the relevant observations from the said judgment are
reproduced hereinbelow:—

“20. The following steps should ordinarily
determine the veracity of a prayer for quashing,
raised by an accused by invoking the power vested
in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C.:
—


(i) Step one, whether the material relied upon by the
accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable,
i.e., the materials is of sterling and impeccable
quality?

(ii) Step two, whether the material relied upon by the
accused, would rule out the assertions contained
in the charges levelled against the accused, i.e.,
the material is sufficient to reject and overrule
the factual assertions contained in the complaint,
i.e., the material is such, as would persuade a
reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the
factual basis of the accusations as false.


(iii) Step three, whether the material relied upon by
the accused, has not been refuted by the
prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is
such, that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the
prosecution/complainant?

- 14 -


(iv) Step four, whether proceeding with the trial
would result in an abuse of process of the court,
and would not serve the ends of justice?

If the answer to all the steps is in the
affirmative, judicial conscience of the High Court
should persuade it to quash such criminal
proceedings, in exercise of power vested in it
under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. Such exercise of
power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save
precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in
holding such a trial (as well as, proceedings arising
therefrom) specially when, it is clear that the same
would not conclude in the conviction of the accused.

[(See: Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor
(Criminal Appeal No. 174 of 2013)]”

[Emphasis supplied]”


The Apex Court holds that the co-accused cannot be treated
differently in quashing proceedings without any cogent reasons
when the allegations stem from a common incident and are found
on substantially similar assertions. In the cases at hand as well, the
allegations against accused Nos. 1 to 3 are similar to the allegations
against accused No.4 and all stem from the publication of
advertisement. Hence, if the proceedings against accused No.4
have been quashed by the coordinate Bench in the judgment
quoted supra and the said quashment has attained finality, I do not
find any reason to differ in the aforesaid circumstance.

- 15 -


9. The Apex Court, in yet another judgment, was considering
the plea of an accused to draw parity with the discharge of co-
accused, as there was no evidence or stronger evidence against the
petitioner before the Apex Court. The Apex Court, in SUSANTA
KUMAR DALEI @ SUSANTA KUMAR DALAI v. STATE OF
3
ODISHA , has held as follows:
“…. …. ….
15. It can be safely stated that firstly, the nature of
accusation is of joint accusation against all the accused
persons including the Appellant and this factum is
revealed from the perusal of the FIR and the charge
sheet. It also reveals further that there is no specific
material against the Appellant nor the Courts below
recorded any finding or observation for not considering
the case of discharge against the Appellant on an
independent assessment of the material qua the
Appellant. Secondly, on the backdrop of similar set of
accusations against the other accused persons, the plea
for discharge by those accused persons is favorably
entertained by the Court qua those accused persons. On
this fact situation, there was no reason for the High Court
to single out the Appellant from the other co-accused
persons and rejecting his claim when the Appellant
claimed parity with the other accused persons. In our
opinion, the reasons assigned by the High Court rejecting
the claim of the Appellant neither stand to reason nor
sustainable on the facts of the matter.

16. In Neelu Chopra v. Bharti 2009 10 SCC 184, it
has been held that :


3

2026 SCC OnLine SC 889

- 16 -


9. In order to lodge a proper complaint,
mere mention of the sections and the language of
those sections is not the be all and end all of the
matter. What is required to be brought to the
notice of the court is the particulars of the offence
committed by each and every accused and the role
played by each and every accused in committing of
that offence.

We are of the opinion that material on record in the
present case do not satisfy such a requirement for
implicating the Appellant in the criminal proceeding
which is pending against him. In the absence of
allegations indicating specific role played by the
Appellant towards commission of the alleged offences,
continuance of criminal proceeding against the Appellant
shall not serve any useful purpose and rather would
amount to abuse of process of court. Therefore, in order
to secure ends of justice, criminal proceeding, against the
Appellant is liable to be dropped.

17. In State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal , 1992 Supp (1)
SCC 335; AIR 1992 SC 604, it has been held that:

102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the
various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter
XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court
in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent
powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we have given the
following categories of cases by way of illustration
wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent
abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure
the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay
down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently
channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae
and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases
wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they
are taken at their face value and accepted in
their entirety do not prima facie constitute any
offence or make out a case against the accused.

- 17 -



(2) Where the allegations in the first information
report and other materials, if any, accompanying
the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence,
justifying an investigation by police officers under
Section 156(1) of the Code except under an
order of a Magistrate within the purview of
Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in
the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected
in support of the same do not disclose the
commission of any offence and make out a case
against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not
constitute a cognizable offence but constitute
only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is
permitted by a police officer without an order of a
Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2)
of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently
improbable on the basis of which no prudent
person can ever reach a just conclusion that
there is sufficient ground for proceeding against
the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in
any of the provisions of the Code or the
concerned Act (under which a criminal
proceeding is instituted) to the institution and
continuance of the proceedings and/or where
there is a specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for
the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the
proceeding is maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the
accused and with a view to spite him due to
private and personal grudge.

In the present case, the allegations are vague and do not
specify the Appellant's role. This falls squarely within the first

- 18 -


category mentioned above. Even if the entire prosecution case is
taken as true, there is no material that specifically links the
Appellant to the alleged offence. Therefore, the discharge
petition deserves to be allowed. If there's any indication that
the Appellant was roped in simply because they were part
of a larger group or due to political/personal vendetta,
and there is no clear act or role assigned, it can be
observed that the continuation of proceedings amounts to
harassment and abuse of the process of law.

18. The Court is not convinced that continuing the
criminal case against the Appellant would be fair or just. The
Appellant has approached this Court saying that the
allegations made in the chargesheet are unclear, general,
and do not mention any specific wrongdoing by them.
After carefully checking the records, the Court agrees
with this argument.

19. In any criminal case, there must be clear and
specific material that shows the accused might have
committed the crime. A case cannot be allowed to
continue based only on guesses or vague statements. In
this case, the material does not show any direct
involvement of the Appellant in the crime. The
accusations are made against a group of people together
and do not explain what exactly the Appellant is
supposed to have done. Such broad and general claims,
without mentioning the Appellant's individual role, are
not enough to continue with the trial.

20. We are of the opinion that the presence of general
allegations, without any overt act or specific imputations against
the accused, cannot be sufficient to proceed to trial. The law is
well settled that at the stage of consideration of
discharge, though a detailed appreciation of evidence is
not warranted, the Court must be satisfied that there
exists sufficient ground for proceeding against the
accused. In this case, even if the entirety of the material
produced by the prosecution is accepted as true, it does
not disclose the commission of any offence by the
Appellant. The allegations appear to be cast in a net wide
enough to implicate all, without regard to individual acts
or culpability. This is impermissible under law.

- 19 -


21. Furthermore, it is not in dispute that two co-accused,
namely Indian Forest Service officers who were similarly
situated and even more prominently placed in the administrative
chain of events, have already been discharged by the High
Court. A comparative examination of the roles ascribed to the
discharged co-accused and the present Appellant shows no
distinguishable basis that would justify differential treatment.
The principle of parity, which is a fundamental tenet of criminal
jurisprudence, requires that similarly situated accused persons
be treated alike. When the allegations and evidence against the
Appellant are not even qualitatively stronger than those against
the discharged co-accused, the continuation of proceedings
against the Appellant alone would be arbitrary and violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

22. This Court is further persuaded by the broader
consideration that the criminal process must not be
permitted to degenerate into an instrument of
oppression. The law must act as a shield for the innocent,
not as a sword in the hands of the vindictive. Where the
material does not disclose the commission of an offence,
the Court is duty-bound to interdict the proceedings at
the threshold. The criminal trial is not a mere formality,
nor a ritualistic procedure to be endured regardless of
merit. It entails stigma, hardship, and irreparable harm
to the reputation and liberty of the individual. Where the
materials do not establish even a grave suspicion, the
accused must not be compelled to undergo the ordeal of
trial.”

(Emphasis supplied at each instance)

10. In the light of the issue being the same, evidence being
the same and allegations being the same, all stemming from a
solitary advertisement, the benefit that is granted to the co-accused
by quashment cannot be denied to these petitioners.

- 20 -



11. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

O R D E R

(i) Criminal Petitions are allowed.

(ii) Proceedings in C.C.No.7399 of 2024 arising out of
P.C.R.No.3878 of 2023 pending before the XLII
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru stand
quashed qua the petitioners.


Pending applications if any, also stand disposed.





Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE

BKP