Karnataka HC Quashes Attempt-to-Murder Case Against Man Complainant Said Was Absent From Attack And Involved Only In Settling Dispute

Respondent No. 2’s complaint led to registration of Crime No. 176/2021 for offences under Sections 506, 34, 504, 323 and 324 IPC.

The petitioner was not named in the FIR but was later charge-sheeted as Accused No. 5 for offences including Sections 307 and 149 IPC; the case proceeded as S.C. No. 43/2023.

The petitioner sought quashing of the proceedings against him.

He and Respondent No. 2 filed a joint affidavit stating that they had resolved their differences and that the complainant had no objection to quashing the case insofar as it concerned the petitioner.

Respondent No. 2 told the Court that the petitioner was not present at the incident and that the allegations were directed at Accused Nos. 1–3.

The petitioner invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, corresponding to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and the parties relied on Section 320 Cr.P.C. in presenting their compromise.

The Court considered whether its inherent jurisdiction should be exercised to prevent continuation of proceedings that, on the material before it, would not serve the interest of justice.

No judicial precedent was cited in the order.

The Court considered the complainant’s in-person confirmation that the petitioner was not present at the incident and that he had no complaint against him.

It also examined the charge-sheet material, which attributed to the petitioner only an effort to help resolve the dispute; the Court found no other statement implicating him.

Although the alleged offences were serious, the Court concluded that the allegations could not be attributed to the petitioner and were directed instead at Accused Nos. 1–4.

In those circumstances, continuing the proceedings against the petitioner would not be in the interest of justice.

It expressly directed that the proceedings continue against Accused Nos. 1–4.