SMT. VINUTHA D.S. vs STATE OF KARNATAKA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024





IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 17 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1146 OF 2024


BETWEEN:

SMT. VINUTHA D.S.
D/O LATE C.S.SIDDAPPA
W/O HARSHA UMESH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/A NO.411, 9TH CROSS,
MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 086.
…PETITIONER








(BY SMT. SAI EESHA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.HARISH H.V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY ITS STATE BY
MAHALAKSHMIPURA POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU,
NOW REP BY IT'S
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT COMPLEX
BENGALURU-560 001.

2. SRI. D.S.DEEPAK
S/O LATE C.S.SIDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/A NO.411, 9TH CROSS,



Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 086.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.MAHESHA P., HCGP FOR R-1;
R-2 NOTICE SD)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASHING THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.9577/2023
ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCE
P/US.427, 448 OF IPC ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU AGAINST THE
PETITIONER/ACCUSED.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash
the proceedings in C.C.No.9577/2023, arising out of Crime
No.223/2022 dated 09.11.2022, filed by the
Mahalakshmipuram Police Station, Bengaluru City, against the
petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 427 and
448 of IPC, pending on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Bengaluru.

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2
lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 09.11.2022,
alleging that he and his family members had gone to their
native place to attend a function on 31.10.2022 and, upon
returning on 06.11.2022, found that the petitioner had broken
open the door, trespassed into their house and damaged the
articles therein. It is further alleged that o earlier occasion
when the complainant had gone to Mandya, the petitioner had
similarly trespassed into their house on 14.08.2022. In respect
of the said incident, the complainant had informed the Police,
who registered a non-cognizable report in NCR No.247/2022.
However, in respect of the incident dated 31.10.2022, the
complainant, after discussing the matter with his family
members, lodged the complaint on 09.11.2022. Based on the
said complaint, the Police registered an FIR in Crime
No.223/2022 against the petitioner for the aforementioned
offences. Subsequently, respondent No.1-Police conducted the
investigation and filed the charge sheet against the petitioner
for the aforesaid offences. The learned Magistrate accordingly

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



took cognizance of the offences. Aggrieved by the same, the

petitioner has preferred the present petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned
HCGP.
4. The primary contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner is that a civil dispute is pending between the parties
in O.S.No.1102/2022, instituted by the petitioner against
respondent No.2 and another, seeking partition and separate
possession. The learned counsel further submits that the Trial
Court, by order dated 23.01.2023, granted an interim order of
injunction in favour of the petitioner and against respondent
No.2. It is contended that respondent No.2, with an intention to
give a criminal colour to the civil dispute, has lodged a false
complaint against the petitioner. It is further contended that,
except for certain omnibus allegations, the complaint contains
no specific averments against the petitioner and that there is
an inordinate delay in lodging the complaint. Accordingly, the
learned counsel for the petitioner prays to allow the petition.

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



5. Per contra , learned HCGP opposed the petition,
contending that the charge sheet has been filed against the
petitioner and that the material on record discloses allegations
against her. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration both on the
submission and perused the charge sheet materials.
7. As could be gathered from the complaint and charge
sheet averments, the relationship between the parties is not in
dispute. The petitioner is the sister of respondent No.2.
Admittedly, a civil suit in O.S.No.1102/2022 is pending
between the petitioner and respondent No.2 in respect of the
ancestral property, seeking partition and separate possession,
which was instituted by the petitioner against respondent No.2.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
both the petitioner and respondent No.2 are residing in the
same building. The complaint averments disclose that the
alleged incident occurred on 31.10.2022 and came to the
knowledge of respondent No.2 on 06.11.2022. However, the
complaint was lodged only on 09.11.2022. In the aforesaid
circumstances, the delay in lodging the complaint raises a

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



doubt regarding the genesis of the crime. It is also relevant to
note that, prior to lodging the present complaint, respondent
No.2 had lodged a similar complaint against the petitioner,
which was registered in NCR No.247/2022. In the aforesaid
circumstances, having regard to the admitted civil dispute
between the parties and the nature of the allegations made in
the complaint, this Court is of the considered view that there is
a substantial force in the contentions advanced by the learned
counsel for the petitioner. In such circumstances, the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of BIKKU BHAI GOVINDA BHAI VS.
STATE OF GUJARAT in SLP (Crl) No.15537/2023 dated
22.05.2026, held in paragraph Nos.52 to 54 as under:
"52. The present case, viewed in its peculiar
facts and circumstances, constitutes all the
characteristics of a civil property dispute, which is
sought to be converted into criminal proceedings,
after several years of civil litigation. We are of the
opinion that the criminal process cannot be
permitted to become a weapon of harassment and
coercion in disputes concerning title over
immovable property.
53. We are conscious of the principles laid
down by this Court in the recent decision of
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of
Maharashtra (supra) that courts should ordinarily
refrain from interfering at the threshold stage of
investigation. However, the said judgment itself

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



recognises that where the allegations do not
disclose the commission of cognizable offences or
where criminal proceedings manifestly amount to
abuse of process, the High Court is duty-bound to
exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482
of the Cr.P.C.
54. The present case falls squarely within the
well-settled categories warranting interference
under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C as Page 28
delineated in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal,12
namely, where the dispute is predominantly civil in
nature, where the allegations fail to disclose the
essential ingredients of the alleged offences, where
the criminal proceedings are manifestly attended
with mala fide intention, where there is
extraordinary and unexplained delay, and where
continuation of the prosecution would amount to
abuse of process of court."

8. On collocating the above findings of the Hon'ble Apex
Court to the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the
considered view that continuation of proceedings against this
petitioner would amounts to abuse of process of Court.
Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER


i. The criminal petition is allowed .

ii. The proceedings against the petitioner in
C.C.No.9577/2023, arising out of Crime
No.223/2022 dated 09.11.2022, filed by the

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:59323
CRL.P No. 1146 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010062662024



Mahalakshmipuram Police Station, Bengaluru
City, for the offences punishable under
Sections 427 and 448 of IPC pending on the file
of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru,
are hereby quashed.


SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE











GPG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17