NAGARAJ C K vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 5 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4264 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. NAGARAJ C.K
S/O LATE KENCHA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT NO.212, VINITH ESTATE
HAROHALLI HOBLI,
KADUJAKKASANDRA VILLAGE
KADUJAKKASANDRA
RAMANAGARA - 562 112
2. GAYATHRI K.S
W/O B.T CHIKKAPUTTEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT NO.342, SHILAJANYA
TH ND
5 MAIN ROAD, 2 CROSS,
NEAR RAILWAY STATION
KENGERI UPANAGAR
BENGALURU- 560 060
3. CHIKKAPUTTEGOWDA B.T
S/O TAMMANNA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT NO.342, SHILAJANYA
TH ND
5 MAIN ROAD, 2 CROSS,
NEAR RAILWAY STATION
KENGERI UPANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 060
4. ASHA @ MEENAKSHI
W/O MANJUNATHA K
TH TH
#61, 9 MAIN, 10 CROSS,
NEAR VENKATESHWARA
Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
TEMPLE SRINIVASANAGAR
BANGALORE SOUTH
BANGALORE - 560 050
5. SHIVAPPA K.P
S/O LATE PUTTASIDDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
R/AT 1853 D NISARGA, 4 TH CROSS
NEAR CHAMUNDESHWARI TEMPLE
CHAMUNDESHWARI EXTENSION
RAMANAGAR - 571 511
6. D.H SAVITHRAMMA
W/O K.P SHIVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
TH
R/AT 1853 D NISARGA, 4 CROSS
NEAR CHAMUNDESHWARI TEMPLE
CHAMUNDESHWARI EXTENSION
RAMANAGAR - 571 511
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
KENGERI POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001
2. SHIVASIDDAIAH S
WORKING AS ASSISTANT SUB-INSPECTOR,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
KENGERI POLICE STATION
KENGERI BENGALURU - 560 060
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P. MAHESHA, HCGP FOR R1,
R2 - SERVED)
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.6001/2023 PURSUANT TO
THE REGISTRATION OF FIR IN CR.NO.375/2023 OF KENGERI
POLICE STATION, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XLVI ACMM
BENGALURU REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/US/
427,143,148,149,448,291,353 OF IPC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
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 seeking
to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1
to 6 in C.C No.6001/2024, arising out of Crime No.375/2023
registered Kengeri Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 427, 143, 147, 148, 448, 291, 353 r/w 149 of
IPC and Section 2 of Prevention of Destruction and Loss of
Property Act, 1981, pending on the file of XLVI ACMM at
Bengaluru (for short, 'the learned Magistrate').
2. The abridged facts of the case are that respondent
No.2-complainant being the ASI of Kengeri Police Station
lodged a complaint before respondent No.1-police alleging that
when he was on night patrol duty on 18.08.2023 along with
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
Police Constable Veeresh Kumar. At about 10.02 p.m., he
received information regarding a disturbance near house
No.342, 5th Main, 2nd Cross, Kengeri Upanagar, Bengaluru. On
reaching the spot, he learnt that, pursuant to a Court order, the
Court Commissioner had evicted petitioner No.2 and others
from the house and handed over possession to Tumakuru
Veerashaiva Co-operative Bank Limited. However, petitioner
No.2 and her family members had allegedly trespassed into the
property, resulting in the registration of Crime No.374/2023.
3. It is further alleged that about 15 persons
assembled near the house and attempted to break open the
gate and enter the premises. When the respondent No.2
instructed them not to disturb the peace and to resolve the
dispute before the Court, they allegedly abused and threatened
him, pushed and manhandled the police personnel and private
security guards, and obstructed the police in discharging their
official duties. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 others, who were inside
the house, allegedly instigated the petitioner No.1 and other
persons outside and threatened the police they would file case
against them. The incident disturbed public peace and caused
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
inconvenience to the neighbouring residents. Hence,
respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against the petitioners and
others before the respondent No.1-police.
4. On this basis of the complaint, the respondent No.1
- Police have registered a case against the petitioners and
others, in Crime No. 375/2023 for the aforementioned offences.
Upon completion of investigation the respondent No.1 - police
laid charge sheet against the petitioners for the aforementioned
offences by arraying them as accused Nos. 1 to 6. Accordingly,
the learned Magistrate, took of the offences. Aggrieved by the
same, the petitioners have preferred the present petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 -
State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 -
complainant.
.
6 Apart from raising several other contentions,
learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the
complaint was lodged out of vendetta and vengeance, as a
counterblast to the suit instituted by the petitioners and the
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
injunction order obtained against the auction purchaser. He
submitted that the petitioners, being the owners of the house,
had never trespassed into the subject property or taken
possession thereof. He further contended that the auction
purchaser, Hemavathy, had lodged a complaint against the
petitioners on 17.08.2023, registered in Crime No.374/2023,
and that the Bank officials had also lodged a complaint in Crime
No.287/2022 on a similar cause of action. He alleged that
respondent No.2-police lodged the present complaint at the
instance of the auction purchaser, despite the litigation pending
between the petitioners and the auction purchaser before the
DRT. Accordingly, he sought to allow the petition.
7. Per contra , learned counsel for respondent No.2
contended that, after the Bank officials delivered possession of
the subject property to the auction purchaser, the petitioners
illegally trespassed into the property and forcibly continued to
occupy it in violation of the Court order, thereby committing
the alleged offences. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the
petition.
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
8. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing
for respondent No.1-State also opposed the prayer in the
petition and prays to dismiss the petition.
9. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective
parties so also perused the entire materials on record.
10. As could be gathered from records, admittedly,
Hemavathy purchased the subject property in an auction
conducted by the Tumakuru Veerashaiva Co-operative Bank
Limited. She lodged a complaint against the petitioners on
11.12.2023 on similar allegations, which was registered in
Crime No.617/2023. The said complaint also alleges that the
petitioners illegally trespassed into the property, forcibly
occupied it and assaulted the auction purchaser. The said Bank
had earlier lodged another complaint on similar allegations,
registered in Crime No.287/2022. Thus, the allegations in the
aforesaid cases are similar in nature.
11. In the present case, respondent No.2 being the ASI
of respondent No.1-police lodged the complaint against the
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
petitioners. Having regard to the similarity of allegations in the
three cases, the continuation of the present proceedings would
attract the principle of sameness and raise the issue of double
jeopardy. Hence, I am of the considered view that continuation
of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would
amount to an abuse of the procwess of law. Even if the
allegations in the FIR and charge sheet are accepted at face
value, they do not prima facie constitute the offences alleged
against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6. Accordingly, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
allowed
i. The petition is .
ii. The proceedings against the
petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 6 in C.C
No.6001/2024, arising out of Crime
No.375/2023 registered Kengeri Police
Station for the offences punishable under
Sections 427, 143, 147, 148, 448, 291, 353
r/w 149 of IPC and Section 2 of Prevention
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55155
CRL.P No. 4264 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272902024
of Destruction and Loss of Property Act,
1981, pending on the file of XLVI ACMM at
Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.
SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
PKS/K
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1