Karnataka High Court
Dr. Brhmanand vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 8 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885
CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.201607 OF 2024
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
DR. BRHMANAND
S/O KALLAYYA SWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/O H.NO.8-11-254,
RAGHAVENDRA COLONY,
BIDAR-585401.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI RAVI B. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
by RENUKA THROUGH MARKET POLICE STATION, BIDAR,
Location: HIGH DIST. BIDAR,
COURT OF REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP,
KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI-585107.
2. NAGAPPA S/O BHIMAGOND KHANDBALLE,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OCC: NOT KNOWN,
R/O GADGI VILLAGE,
TQ. AND DIST. BIDAR-585401.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ANITHA M. REDDY, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI RAJESH G. DODDAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885
CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024
HC-KAR
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C., (OLD), UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS (NEW),
PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.3887/2022
ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.134/2012 REGISTERED BY THE
RESPONDENT POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS
120-B, 209, 420, 423, 424, 467, 468, 471 READ WITH 149 OF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, AND THE ORDER OF COGNIZANCE
DATED 01.10.2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF IST ADDL. CIVIL
JUDGE AND JMFC-II AT BIDAR.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) This petition is filed by accused No.3, a practicing doctor at Siddharudha Charitable Hospital, Bidar who had treated one lady by name Chinnamma.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that one Nagappa, the brother-in-law of Chinnamma, lodged a complaint alleging that Chinnamma was married to Shivaraj @ Shivgond, and the couple had no children. It is -3- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885 CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024 HC-KAR alleged that the properties in question are ancestral in nature and that, upon the demise of Shivaraj @ Shivgond, Chinnamma, being his widow, succeeded to her husband's estate. The complaint further alleges that Chinnamma died intestate, and after her death, the accused persons fabricated and brought into existence a false document styled as a "Gift Deed" purportedly executed in favour of Prabhakar, S/o Ramayya (accused No.4).
3. The further case of the prosecution is that the present petitioner, who is a medical practitioner, allegedly assisted accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 to 6 in the preparation of the aforesaid forged document by issuing a medical certificate certifying that Chinnamma was in a sound and disposing state of mind at the relevant point of time. Based on this allegation, the jurisdictional police conducted an investigation and have now laid a charge-sheet arraying the present petitioner as accused No.3, on the ground that he had treated Chinnamma and allegedly facilitated the execution of the impugned document. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885 CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024 HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, has placed strong reliance on the judgment rendered by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Petition No.200704/2023. In the said case, the prime accused, namely accused No.1, had sought quashing of the proceedings arising out of the same transaction. The Co- ordinate Bench, by order dated 24.07.2023, allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings insofar as they pertain to accused No.1, holding that the allegations did not disclose the ingredients of the alleged offences.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-defacto complainant and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State, referring to the charge-sheet material, vehemently contended that there exist certain materials prima facie indicating the petitioner's involvement in the alleged acts. They submitted that the judgment of the Co- ordinate Bench, quashing the proceedings against accused -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885 CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024 HC-KAR No.1, cannot automatically be extended to the benefit of the present petitioner, as the nature of the allegations against him stands on a distinct footing and requires independent consideration.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on a careful perusal of the charge-sheet material, this Court has bestowed its anxious consideration to ascertain whether any prima facie case is made out against the present petitioner. Except for a mere reference to the petitioner's name in Column No.17 of the charge-sheet, there is absolutely no material indicating his active participation or complicity in the alleged offences. The Investigating Officer has not collected any substantive or corroborative evidence that could justify the petitioner's prosecution.
7. It is an undisputed fact that the prime accused, namely accused No.1, had earlier approached this Court in Criminal Petition No.200704/2023, wherein this Court, -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885 CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024 HC-KAR after a detailed evaluation of the same set of allegations and materials, was pleased to quash the proceedings as against him. When the principal accused in the alleged offence has already been discharged from criminal prosecution, continuation of proceedings against the present petitioner, who is merely a medical practitioner alleged to have issued a certificate in the ordinary course of his professional duty, would serve no meaningful purpose.
8. A practicing doctor who had attended to Chinnamma during her lifetime cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution in the absence of specific, cogent, and incriminating material showing his intentional participation in the alleged acts of forgery or conspiracy. The issuance of a medical certificate, by itself, without proof of collusion or mala fides, cannot attract criminal liability. The prosecution, therefore, appears to be based on presumptions rather than evidence.
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885 CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024 HC-KAR
9. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that the Co-ordinate Bench, while quashing the proceedings against accused No.1, has already examined the nature of allegations and found them to be devoid of criminal intent. The present case stands on an even weaker footing, as there are no independent allegations against the petitioner except a passing reference to his name. Even if the entire charge-sheet material is taken at face value, it does not disclose the ingredients of any of the offences alleged. Allowing the proceedings to continue in such circumstances would amount to harassment and an abuse of the process of law.
10. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that to secure the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of judicial process, it is just and proper to invoke the inherent powers vested under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner. -8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5885 CRL.P No. 201607 of 2024 HC-KAR
11. Accordingly, this Court passes the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
(ii) The proceedings in C.C. No.3887/2022, arising out of Crime No.134/2012, registered by the Market Police Station, Bidar, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 209, 420, 423, 424, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and the order of cognizance dated 01.10.2022 pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-II, Bidar, are hereby quashed insofar as the present petitioner is concerned.
(iii) In view of the disposal of the main petition, any pending interlocutory applications do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE RSP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31 CT: SI