Karnataka High Court
Nagaraj Son Of Venkappa Bandivaddar vs State Of Karnataka on 10 March, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4505
CRL.P No. 100288 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100288 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
NAGARAJ SON OF VENKAPPA BANDIVADDAR,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
RESIDENT OF BASAPUR-VILLAGE,
HAVERI-TALUK, DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI M R HIREMATHAD AND
SRI PRAKASH BADIGER, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI,
KUMARAPATTANAM POLICE STATION,
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDINGS,
DHARWAD - 581 001.
2. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDED OF POLICE,
Digitally signed by HAVERI DISTRICT, HAVERI.
ASHPAK KASHIMSA
MALAGALADINNI
Location: High Court
of Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench,
3. DAYANAND SON OF VEERABHDRAPPA KATTIMANI,
Dharwad
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC- BAR BENDING,
RESIDENT OF VIDYANAGARA, KATURU,
TALUK- RANBENNUR,
DISTRICT- HAVERI - 581115.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
NOTICE TO R3 IS SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., 1973,
PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE COURT OF LEARNED
ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND 1ST ADDITIONAL JMFC, RANEBENNUR
AND QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN KUMARAPATTANAM P.S.CRIME
NO.31/2019 (C.C.NO.483/2019) ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL
JUDGE AND 1ST ADDITIONAL JMFC, AT RANEBENNUR, PUNISHABLE
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4505
CRL.P No. 100288 of 2020
U/S 279, 304(A) OF IPC, U/S 134(A) (B), READ WITH 187, AND 3
READ WITH 181, 146, READ WITH 196 OF M.V. ACT, THEREBY
QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.483/2019 ON THE
FILE OF LEARNED PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND 1ST ADDITIONAL
JMFC, AT RANEBENNUR AND PASS SUCH RELIEF OR DIRECTION OR
ORDER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THERIEN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed by the sole accused/petitioner
under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure praying
to quash chargesheet filed in Kumarapattanam Police
Station Crime No.31/2019, registered for offences
punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) IPC and Section
134(A)(B) r/w Section 187 and 3 r/w Sections 181 and
146 r/w 196 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘M.V. Act‘, for short) pending in C.C.
No.483/2019 on the file of Prl. Civil Judge and I Addl.
JMFC, Ranebennur.
2. Respondent No.2 has filed a complaint dated
02.04.2019 stating that petitioner drove his lorry bearing
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4505
CRL.P No. 100288 of 2020
Reg.No.KA-08/8291 in a rash and negligent manner and
dashed to the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-17/V-3129
which was driven by deceased Monesh and the said
Monesh sustained severe injuries and died in the hospital.
The said complaint came to be registered in Crime
No.31/2019 of Kumarapattanam P.S. for offences
punishable under Sections 279, 304(A) IPC and Section
134(a)(b) of M.V. Act r/w Section 187 of M.V. Act. The
Police after investigation, filed a chargesheet against the
petitioner for offences under Sections 279, 304(A) IPC and
under Sections 146, 181, 196, 3, 134 (A and B) and 187
of M.V. Act.
3. On the basis of the said chargesheet, a case
came to be registered against the petitioner in C.C.
No.483/2019 and it is pending on the file of Prl. Civil Judge
and I Addl. JMFC, Ranebennur. The petitioner has sought
for quashing of the said chargesheet and proceedings in
the said criminal case.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4505
CRL.P No. 100288 of 2020
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned AGA for respondent No.1-State. Inspite of service
of notice, respondent No.2 remained absent and
unrepresented.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner would contend
that a false complaint has been lodged against the
petitioner. He submits that the petitioner after the
accident went to Police station and explained how the
accident occurred. The Police did not take the said aspect
and therefore, the petitioner filed complaint in
C.C.No.15/2019 before Prl. Civil Judge and I Addl. JMFC,
Ranebennur and subsequently the petitioner withdrew the
said complaint as there was settlement out of Court.
6. He further submits that PW-1 who is the
complainant and eye witness to the incident has not
supported the case of the prosecution, that itself indicate
that the complaint is false. On these grounds, he prayed
for quashing of the proceedings.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4505
CRL.P No. 100288 of 2020
7. Learned AGA would contend that the trial has
been commenced and one witness i.e., complainant has
been examined as PW-1. The prosecution has to examine
other witnesses including three eye witnesses namely,
CW-6 to CW-8. The petitioner intended to prove a fact and
that can be done during the course of the trial. As there
are eye witnesses to the incident, the proceedings cannot
be quashed only on the ground that PW-1 has not
supported the case of prosecution. With this, he prayed for
dismissal of the petition.
8. Having heard learned counsels, the Court has
perused chargesheet and other materials placed on record.
9. The respondent No.2-complainant has filed
complaint dated 02.04.2019 stating that
petitioner/accused drove his lorry in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed to the motorcycle of deceased Monesh
bearing Reg.No.KA-17/V-3129 and as a result, Monesh
sustained injuries and died in the hospital. The said
complainant i.e., respondent No.2 has been examined as
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:4505
CRL.P No. 100288 of 2020
PW-1 and he has not supported the case of the
prosecution. On perusal of the chargesheet, there are
three eye witnesses to the incident and they are cited as
CW-6 to CW-8. The said eye witnesses CW-6 to CW-8 are
yet to be examined. Merely, because complainant has not
supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile is
not a ground for quashing of proceedings against the
petitioner. The petitioner who had filed complaint has
withdrawn it subsequently. Considering all these aspects,
there are no grounds for quashing of proceedings as
sought for.
10. In the result, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
RKM
CT-ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37