Karnataka High Court
Mallamma And Ors vs The State And Anr on 16 June, 2025
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200149 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. MALLAMMA W/O SOMSHEKHARAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 86 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
2. RAJSHEKHAR S/O SIDDABASAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
BOTH ARE R/O MAIN ROAD, TALIKOTI,
DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586 214.
3. SRIKANTH S/O RAJSHEKHAR HIREMATH,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: MANAGER, SIDBI,
Digitally signed R/O MAIN ROAD, TALIKOTI,
by RENUKA DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586 214,
Location: HIGH BUT NOW R/O SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BANK OF INDIA, D-31 AND D-32, REGAL HEIGHTS,
VASANTH NAGARI, VASI-EAST, PHALGHAR.
4. GAJADANDA SWAMI S/O VEERAYYA SWAMY
HIREMATH,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: KIOSKO OPERATOR,
MAIN ROAD, TALIKOTI, DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586 214.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI NANDKISHORE BOOB, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
1. THE STATE,
THROUGH TALIKOTI P.S. VIJAYAPUR,
NOW REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL. SPP,
HCKB AT KALABURAGI.
2. SMT. DAKSHYANI W/O MALASIDDAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: NIL, (RETD.),
R/O H.NO.589, SHARANA NILAYA,
P AND T QUARTERS, VIJAYAPUR-586 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C.
(OLD), U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN CC NO.1203/2024 PENDING ON THE
FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, MUDDEBIHAL FOR
THE OFFENCES U/S 447, 427, 109, 504 AND 506 R/W 34 OF
IPC (U/S 329, 324(4), 49, 353, 351 R/W 3(5) OF BNS, 2023)
AGAINST THE PETITIONERS AND FURTHER REQUEST TO
QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS/
A.NOS. 1 TO 4.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA)
Heard Sri Nandkishore Boob, learned counsel for the
petitioners, Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court
Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and
Sri Manvendra Reddy, learned counsel for respondent
No.2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are aged about 86 years and 72
years respectively and therefore, they are unable to
appear before this Court.
3. He would further contend that petitioner No.3
could not also be present as he is working as Manager in
Small Industries Development Bank, Talikoti and petitioner
No.4 is working as KIOSKO Operator in Talikoti.
Respondent No.2 is present along with her counsel.
4. This petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
2023 with the following prayer:
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025HC-KAR
“Praying to call for the entire records in
C.C.No.1203/2024, pending on the file of Civil Judge
and JMFC Court, Muddebihal for the offences u/S.
447, 427, 109, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC (u/S. 329,
324(4), 49, 353, 351 r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023) against
the petitioners and further request to quash the
proceedings against the petitioners/A.Nos.1 to 4.”
5. Facts of the case are as under:
A complaint came to be lodged with Talikoti Police
Station, Vijayapura, which was registered in Crime
No.22/2024 on 20.01.2024 for the offences punishable
under Sections 447, 427, 109, 504 and 506 read with
Section 34 of IPC (under Sections 329, 324(4), 49, 353,
351 read with Section 3(5) of BNS, 2023).
6. The gist of the complaint averments reveal that
respondent No.2 is residing in a house at KHB Colony,
Talikoti and said plot measures 80×50 feet and the same is
purchased on 18.05.2020 from petitioner No.1 –
Mallamma. Revenue records were also mutated and she is
paying the taxes to the Revenue Authorities.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
7. When the matter stood thus, all the petitioners
trespassed into the house of the complainant and they
damaged the compound wall and removed the drainage
pipe. When the same was questioned by respondent
No.2/complainant, all the petitioners abused them in filthy
language and told the complainant that the plot belongs to
them and they would take away the life of the complainant
and her supporters.
8. Based on the said complaint, police registered
the case, investigated the matter and filed charge sheet.
The learned Trial Judge has taken cognizance of the
offences alleged against the petitioners by order dated
03.04.2024.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
a false complaint has been filed, which has not been
properly investigated by the police and charge sheet came
to field, resulting in abuse of process of Court.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
10. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2
would support continuation of the criminal proceedings by
contending that necessary materials have been collected
by the Investigation Agency to file the charge sheet
against the petitioners and sought for dismissal of the
petition.
11. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this
Court perused the material on record meticulously.
12. On such perusal of the material on record, it is
seen that petitioner No.1 has sold the disputed property to
respondent No.2/complainant by way of registered sale
deed in the year 2000. Revenue records are mutated and
respondent No.2 is paying the taxes to the Municipal
Authorities.
13. When the matter stood thus, on the imaginary
claim, all the petitioners joined together and trespassed
into the house of respondent No.2 and they have damaged
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
the compound wall and roof and they also removed the
drainage pipes.
14. When petitioner No.1 has already sold the
subject property in the year 2000, there was no necessity
for the petitioners to trespass into the house of respondent
No.2. Anyway, these are all the disputed questions, which
need to be established during trail.
15. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 also
brought to the notice of this Court that petitioners had
also lodged a complaint against the
complainant/respondent No.2, which ended in filing of ‘B’
final report.
16. It is pertinent to note that the petitioners have
suppressed the very filing of the complaint, which was
registered in Crime No.127/2024 on 29.06.2024. These
are all the factors, which are to be thoroughly adjudicated
after framing the necessary charges by the jurisdictional
Magistrate.
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3100
CRL.P No. 200149 of 2025
HC-KAR
17. Under the circumstances, having regard to the
scope of the jurisdiction that could be exercised under
Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the grounds urged in the petition are not
sufficient to quash the pending criminal proceedings.
18. Accordingly, following:
ORDER
a) Criminal petition is dismissed.
b) However, all the available defences to the
petitioners are kept open to be
canvassed/urged in the pending trial in
accordance with law.
c) In view of disposal of main petition,
pending application does not survive for
consideration.
Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
SRT
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79
CT: AK