Karnataka High Court
Shri. Mahaling S/O Parasappa Nander vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 June, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 100658 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. MAHALING
S/O PARASAPPA NANDER
AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC:ASI
R/O: GOKAK NOW AT
RAMADURGA TALUK
BELAGAVI DISTRICT - 591 123.
2. SHRI DINAKAR
S/O KUMAR HUDALI
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC:HOME GUARD
R/O: AJIT NAGAR, CHINCHALI
TQ: RAYABAG
DISTRICT BELAGAVI - 591 123.
...PETITIONERS
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
(BY SRI SANTOSH B MALAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH PSI GOKAK RURAL POLICE STATION
REPTD. BY ITS ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH.
2. SRI KIRAN S MOHITE
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: POLICE OFFICER
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
GOKAK RURAL POLICE STATION
DISTRICT BELAGAVI
REP. BY SPP HCK DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAMESH B CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1 & R2 - V.C)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF Cr.P.C. (U/S. 528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO ALLOW
THIS PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AND
ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET SUBMITTED IN CRIME No.120/2024
DATED 25.09.2024 REGISTERED BY GOKAK RURAL POLICE
STATION FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B,
109, 480A, 489B, 489C, 406, 419, 420 AND 201 OF IPC,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF XII ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
COURT BELAGAVI, SITTING AT GOKAK IN S.C.No. 8001/2025,
IN RESPECT OF THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED Nos. 10 AND 11
ARE CONCERNED AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR)
This petition is filed by petitioners / accused Nos.10
and 11 praying to quash the entire proceedings and
charge sheet in Crime No.120/2024 of Gokak Rural Police
Station registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 120B, 109, 489A, 489B, 489C, 406, 419, 420 and
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
201 of IPC pending on the file of XII Additional District and
Sessions Court, Belagavi sitting at Gokak in
S.C.No.8001/2025.
2. The Police Sub -Inspector, Gokak Rural Police
Station has received credible information on 29.06.2024 at
about 3.00 a.m. when he was on patrolling duty about
transporting currency notes in white color Swift car by
unknown persons. He went to the Police Station, made an
entry in the Station House Dairy and thereafter along with
staff he came near Sri Choudeshwari Temple at about 3.50
a.m. At about 4.30 a.m. white color Swift car came and on
seeing them started reversing the car and they stopped
and there were 05 persons inside the car and they
disclosed their names. The said 05 persons have shown a
black color bag in the dickey contending that it contains
cloths. On asking those 5 persons to open the bag and
when they opened bag the PSI and his team saw Rs.100/-
and 500/- bundle of fake currency notes and on asking
them they told the police that they are fake currency notes
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
intended to circulate in the market. The PSI sent his
complaint at about 5.20 a.m. with his staff. The said
complaint came to be registered in Crime No.120/2024 of
Gokak Rural Police Station for the aforesaid offences.
Thereafter, the PSI has drawn mahazar and seized vehicle,
bag and currency notes under seizure mahazar and
arrested the said 05 persons.
3. The police after investigation filed charge sheet for
the aforesaid offences and the petitioners have been
arrayed as Accused Nos.10 and 11 in the charge sheet.
The offences alleged against the petitioners are under
Sections 489B, 406, 419, 420 of IPC. The accusation
against the petitioners is that they being the police officials
have helped the accused persons for passing through
check post and conducting fake raid when the accused
persons are involved in money doubling.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned HCGP for respondent – State.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend
that except the voluntary statement of accused No.8,
there is no material against the petitioners regarding they
helping the accused persons for passing through check
post. There is no allegation against these petitioners of
preparing fake currency notes and distributing them.
Except that the car of petitioner No.1 / accused No.10
bearing Regn.No.KA-38-M-6049 seized at the instance of
accused No.8 and two mobiles said to be used by
petitioner No.1/Accused No.10 seized which are kept in
the said car. He submits that the said two mobiles are not
in the name of petitioner No.1/accused No.10 and they are
in the name of accused Nos.8 and 9. There is no recovery
from the petitioners. He submits that confession made by
the co-accused is not admissible against any co-accused.
On that point he relies on the decision of Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil
Nadu reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1 and also the decision
of co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Abdul
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
Razak vs. State of Karnataka in
Crl.P.No.100588/2023 disposed on 20.01.2024 which
has been rendered based on the decision of the Hon’ble
Apex Court in Tofan Singh (supra). On the same point
he also placed reliance on decision of this Court in the case
of Siddaraju vs. State of Karnataka and another in
Crl.P.No.12079/2024 disposed on 07.01.2025.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that the offence under Section 420 of IPC is not attracted
as there is no cheating since inception and on that point
he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in the case of Vesa Holdings Private Limited and
another vs. State of Kerala and anothers reported in
(2015) 8 SCC 293. He further submits that dishonest
inducement is sina qua non to attract provision of Section
420 of IPC and on that point he placed reliance on the
decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of A.M.Mohan
vs. State reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 339. He
further submits that test identification has not been
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
conducted and identification by the prosecution is based
on photo shown to CW.22. CW.22 has not stated
regarding the identity of petitioner No.1/Accused No.10 in
his statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. and
he has stated that only two police were present. Though
the phone mapping has been done with the phone of
petitioner No.1/accused No.10 but the said phone has not
been recovered. On these grounds, he prays for allowing
the petition.
7. Per contra, learned HCGP contends that at the
instance of accused No.2, the Car belonging to petitioner
No.1/Accused No.10 and two mobiles used by the
petitioners have been seized. CWs.22 and 23 have
identified petitioner No.1/accused No.10 as the police who
came for raid. The phone mapping report indicate that
petitioner No.1/accused No.10 was found with other
accused on different locations at different points of time
which indicate that he has participated in commission of
offence alleged against him. He placed reliance on the
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
provision of Section 10 of the Evidence Act. On these
grounds he prays for dismissal of the petition.
8. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has
perused the charge sheet materials.
9. The confession of Accused No.8 clearly indicate
that these petitioners/accused Nos.10 and 11 used to help
the accused persons for passing through check post. The
case of the prosecution is not solely based on the said
confession statement of accused No.8. There is seizure of
Car belonging to petitioner No.1/Accused No.10 from the
possession of Accused No.8 along with two mobiles said to
have been used by petitioner No.1/Accused No.10.
CWs.22 and 23 are the two witnesses who have identified
the petitioners on showing their photos stating that they
are two police officials who came for fake raid. There is
phone mapping report of the mobile phone of petitioner
No.1/Accused No.10 which indicates that petitioner
No.1/accused No.10 is found in the same location wherein
the accused are found on the same time and date. CW.22
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:8002
CRL.P No. 100658 of 2025
HC-KAR
has not stated identity of petitioners in his statement
recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., but there is
mention that there are two police. CW.22 has stated in
his statement that he has been shown photos of the
petitioners and he has identified them as police officials
who came for fake raid. As the confession of accused
persons against co-accused is coupled with other materials
of charge sheet, whether it is admissible or not is a matter
of trial. Considering all the charge sheet material there is
a case against the petitioners which requires trial.
Therefore, there are no grounds for quashing the entire
proceedings as sought for. In the result, the petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DKB
List No.: 19 Sl No.: 2
[ad_1]
Source link