Karnataka High Court
Mahadev Shekappa Baanad vs The State Of Karnataka on 7 March, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103347 OF 2023
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. MAHADEV SHEKAPPA BAANAD,
AGE: 28 EYARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB,
R/O: HOSALLI VILLAGE,
GADAG TALUKA, KARNATAKA,
PARMANANT ADDRESS
HOSAHALLI VILLAGE,
MUNDHAL TALUKA,
MAHALINGPURA - 587 312.
2. SRINIVAS
S/O. BHASKR RAO BANDLA,
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB,
R/O: SONDUR TALUK,
RAICHUR KARNATAKA - 583 119.
Digitally signed by
ASHPAK KASHIMSA
MALAGALADINNI
Location: High Court
of Karnataka,
3. MANJUNATH
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad
S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA PUJARI,
AGE: 26 YEARS,
OCC: BANK EMPLOYEE,
R/O: KATKOL VILLAGE RAMDURGA
TALUK: BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA,
PIN CODE: 591 114.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI L. S. SULLAD, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH CIRCLE INSPECTOR MUDHOL,
MAHALINGAPUR P.S.
REPRESENTED BY HCGP,
HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD.
2. BUDANSAAB
S/O. HUSSAINSAAB NADAF,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR,
R/O: DOWLDESHWAR ROAD FORMHOUSE,
MAHALINGAPUR,
BAGALKOT KARNATAKA - 587 312.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC. 482 OF CR.P.C.
(528(BNSS)), SEEKING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED IN
MAHALINGPUR POLICE STATION CRIME NO. 131/2014, C.C.NO.
216/2022 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC BANAHATTI
ALLEGING OFFENCE P/U/SEC. UNDER SECTIONS 420, 511 OF IPC.
PASS ANY OTHER RELIEF IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 under
Section 482 of Cr.PC praying to quash the chargesheet
filed in Mahalingapur Police Station under Crime
No.131/2014 pending in CC No.216/2022 on the file of
Civil Judge and JMFC, Banahatti, registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 511 and 420 of IPC.
2. Column No.17 of the chargesheet filed against
the petitioners and others indicate that all the accused
persons with an intention to cheat the complainant showed
him one copper pot which is covered with carbon sheets
and stated that it is rice pulley and in the olden days if the
copper pot has sustained lightening, it gets godly power
and if the complainant keeps it with him, he will get good
results and it attracts the customers and attempted to sell
the same to the complainant for Rs.1,00,000/- and
committed an offence punishable under Section 511 and
420 of IPC. The said charge sheet is sought to be quashed
in the present petition.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned Additional Government Advocate for
respondent No.1-State.
4. In spite of service of notice respondent No.2
remained absent and unrepresented.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant would
contend that the offence of cheating has not been
completed and there is no attempt to commit cheating as
the accused persons have not received any money from
the complainant and they have offered to sell a copper pot
to the complainant and it does not amount to cheating. On
the point urged, he placed reliance on the decision of this
Court in the case of Deepa Vs. Madhav and Another
passed in Crl.P No.101300/2017 decided on
18.08.2020. He further submits that continuation of
proceedings against the petitioners is a abuse of process
of law, as the acts of the petitioners does not attracts the
offence alleged against them. With this he prays to allow
the petition.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
6. Learned Additional Government Advocate would
contend that the petitioners and the other accused have
been caught red handed by the Police when they made an
attempt to cheat the complainant by offering a copper pot
saying that it is having a godly power and quoting price of
Rs.1,00,000/- and the said copper pot has been seized.
There are eye-witnesses to the said incident who are the
private persons and also the Police officials. On perusal of
the entire chargesheet, there is a prima facie case against
the petitioners and other accused for the offences alleged
against them. With this he prayed to dismiss the petition.
7. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court
has perused the material placed on record.
8. The petitioners and other accused have been
caught red handed along with a copper pot when they
attempted to sell the same to the complainant stating that
it is a rice pulley, having a godly power and it attracts
customers. CWs.4 to 12 are the eye-witnesses to the said
incident of attempt by the petitioners and other accused
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
persons to sell the copper pot to the complainant. If the
complainant had paid Rs.1,00,000/- as offered by the
petitioners and purchased the said copper pot, then the
offence under Section 420 of IPC would have been
completed. As the offence is not completed, it is alleged
that the petitioners and other accused have attempted to
commit cheating. The learned counsel for the petitioner
has placed reliance on the decision of this Court, wherein
it is observed as under;
“6. An offence of cheating is defined
under Section 415 of IPC. The ingredients of
Section 415 are:
(1) Deception of any person.
(2) (a) Fraudulently or dishonestly inducing
that person-
(i) to deliver any property to any
person; or
(ii) to consent that any person
shall retain any property; or
(b) intentionally inducing that person
to do or omit to do anything which he
would not do or omit if he were not so
deceived, and which act or omission
causes or is likely to cause damage or
harm to that person in body, mind,
reputation or property.
7. ‘Deceive’ is one of the ingredients of
offence of cheating. ‘Delivery of any property’ is
another ingredient of cheating. Respondent No.1-
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
complainant has not been deceived and he has
not parted with any property i.e., investment of
Rs.50,000/- with the petitioners. The act of the
petitioners making a phone call and inducing him
to invest Rs.50,000/- by purchasing a insurance
policy from Exide Insurance Company and
promising of taking him to Singapore tour free of
cost is an offer. If the complainant parts with the
said money and purchases the insurance policy
and thereafter if the petitioners does not fulfill
their promise of taking him to Singapore tour,
then, the said act amounts to cheating. Therefore,
the act of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 does
not attract offence of cheating or attempting to
cheat punishable under Section 420 and 511 of
IPC respectively.”
9. The facts of the said case are different, wherein
the petitioners have induced the complainant to purchase
the insurance policy promising him to take to Singapore
for free of cost. In the case on hand, the petitioners and
other accused persons physically went to the complainant,
shown him a copper pot and told him that it is having
godly power and it attracts customers and promotes him
to purchase the same for Rs.1,00,000/-. At that time, the
petitioners and other accused persons caught red handed
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4416
CRL.P No. 103347 of 2023
along with the said copper pot. Considering the said
aspect, the chargesheet contains the material against the
petitioners for trial of offence punishable under Sections
511 and 420 of IPC. The petitioners have not made out
any grounds for quashing the chargesheet as prayed. In
the result, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
PJ/CT-ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21
