Karnataka High Court
Criminal LawCriminal Procedure and Evidence

Affray requires a public-place fight that disturbs public peace.

SRIKANTHA ADIGA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: October 06, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Affray requires a public-place fight that disturbs public peace.. SRIKANTHA ADIGA vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioners, arrayed as accused Nos. 5 to 7, sought to quash proceedings in C.C. No. 2355/2023, arising from a Kollur Police Station case under Section 160 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Source reference: p. 3–4

The complaint alleged that, on 30 November 2023, the complainant, a Police Sub-Inspector, found the petitioners quarrelling in a public place near Kollur Mukkambika Temple and disturbing public peace. After investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the petitioners and four others, and the Magistrate took cognizance.

Source reference: p. 3–4

The petitioners invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), contending that the materials did not disclose the elements of affray.

Source reference: p. 4
02

Issues

Whether the charge-sheet materials disclosed the ingredients of affray under Sections 159 and 160 IPC against the petitioners.

Source reference: p. 4–5, 7

Whether continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners amounted to an abuse of the process of the court warranting relief under Section 482 CrPC.

Source reference: p. 2, 7
03

Law Applied

Section 159 IPC defines affray as a fight between two or more persons in a public place that disturbs the public peace; Section 160 IPC provides the offence and punishment for committing affray.

Source reference: p. 5–7

The Court considered the High Court’s inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings where, even taking the charge-sheet allegations at face value, the alleged offence is not made out and continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

Source reference: p. 2, 7
04

Reasoning

The Court treated a fight in a public place and resulting disturbance of public peace as necessary elements of affray.

Source reference: p. 5

Although the complaint alleged a quarrel in a public place, the charge-sheet witnesses were police officials, and no member of the public was cited as a witness or stated that the alleged fight disturbed public peace.

Source reference: p. 6

The Court also found that the complaint and charge-sheet contained no specific account of an act by the petitioners establishing the offence; accordingly, even accepting the allegations at face value, the ingredients of Sections 159 and 160 IPC were not made out.

Source reference: p. 6–7
05

Holding

The Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings against the petitioners, accused Nos. 5 to 7, in C.C. No. 2355/2023, arising from Crime No. 75/2023, for the offence under Section 160 IPC.
06

Acts & Sections Cited

3 provisions across 2 statutes referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731

Indian Penal Code, 18602

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SRIKANTHA ADIGAvsTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY

Karnataka High Court · October 06, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment