Karnataka High Court
Ashraf Maniyar vs The State Of Karnataka on 13 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446
CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200068 OF 2026
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
ASHRAF MANIYAR D/O DOULSAB
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
OCC: LABOURER
R/AT MANGALAGI VILLAGE,
TQ: KALAGI, DIST: KALABURAGI-585312
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI BASAVARAJ C. JAKA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
SHIVALEELA THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DATTATRAYA
UDAGI THORUGH SULEPTH POLICE STATION
Location: HIGH
COURT OF TQ: CHINCHOLI AND
KARNATAKA
DIST: KALABURAGI-585301
NEW REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585107
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C.
(OLD), U/SEC. 528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS
PETITION AND TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.1766/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446
CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026
HC-KAR
JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHINCHOLI, WHICH WAS REGISTERED
ON THE BASIS OF CASE REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.57/2024
AND FILED CHARGE SHEET BY THE SULEPET POLICE STATION
TQ CHINCHOLI, DIST KALABURAGI FOR THE OFFENCES
PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 78(3) OF KARNATAKA POLICE ACT AND
SEC. 112(2) OF BNS 2023, TO SECURE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE
AND TO PREVENT ABUSE OF PROCESS OF THE COURT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.1766/2024, arising out of Crime No.57/2024 of Sulepet Police, Kalaburagi, for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act, 1963 (for brevity "K.P. Act") and Section 112(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (for brevity "BNS"), pending on the file Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Chincholi.
2. The abridged facts of the case are, based on the suo moto complaint lodged by PSI of Sulepet Police Station, a case is registered against one Rajkumar -3- NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026 HC-KAR Talwar/accused No.1 and this petitioner in Crime No.57/2024. It is alleged in the complaint that on 22.07.2024 at about 03.45 p.m. when the complainant- PSI and her staff were on patrolling duty, they received a credible information that one person near old panchayat office of Nidagunda village was running matka (jujata). Immediately, the complainant, by securing panchas and by informing her senior officials, went to the said spot and noticed that one person was standing near the panchayat office and playing matka by inviting the public that he will give Rs.80/- for Rs.1/-. As such, they went near him and noticed that he was writing the numbers in a paper. By confirming the same, she caught hold the said person and on enquiry, he revealed his name as Rajkumar Talwar and the Police have seized Rs.1,900/-, one pen and one piece of paper, which contains the numbers of persons who made the payment to him. Later, on further enquiry, he stated that the petitioner was conducting the game and he used to hand over the money to the petitioner. -4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026 HC-KAR Accordingly, FIR came to be registered against the said Rajkumar and the petitioner as stated supra. Subsequently, the respondent-Police investigated the case and laid charge sheet against the petitioner and another by arraigning the petitioner as accused No.2 and the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/accused No.2 preferred this petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State.
4. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, except the voluntary statement of accused No.1, absolutely no other piece of evidence or materials are available on record to connect the petitioner in the crime. Hence, as per the settled position of law, only based on the statement of co- accused, a person cannot be implicated in the crime. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition. -5-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026 HC-KAR
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State opposed the prayer on the ground that, now the respondent-Police have completed investigation and laid charge sheet against the petitioner and another, hence, proceedings cannot be quashed. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration both on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and the documents made available on record.
7. On careful scrutiny of the complaint averments and other charge sheet materials, the allegations against the petitioner is that, after conducting the raid by the complainant and her team, they caught hold accused No.1
- Rajkumar Talwar, in-turn he informed them in his voluntary statement that the matka was conducted by the petitioner. However, in the entire charge sheet, no such statement of witnesses or any other materials available to -6- NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026 HC-KAR connect the petitioner for the said act committed by accused No.1. It is now settled position of law that based on the voluntary statement of co-accused, a person cannot be implicated in the crime. The voluntary statement of co- accused by itself cannot be a substantive piece of evidence against another accused and the same is not admissible under Section 25 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, and at best, the same may be used as a corroborative piece of evidence. In such circumstance, in the absence of any other materials against the petitioner, he cannot be implicated in the crime.
8. Learned High Court Government Pleader on instructions and on perusal of the entire charge sheet materials fairly submits that except voluntary statement of accused No.1, no other materials are placed in the charge sheet against the petitioner. Though Section 112(2) of BNS, 2023 is invoked in the charge sheet, the respondent- Police have not placed any materials to show that this petitioner is a member of organized crime. -7-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1446 CRL.P No. 200068 of 2026 HC-KAR
9. In such circumstance, I am of the considered view that continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner i.e., accused No.2 is abuse of process of Court. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER i. The petition is allowed.
ii. The proceedings against the petitioner/ accused No.2 in C.C.No.1766/2024, arising out of Crime No.57/2024 of Sulepet Police, Kalaburagi, for the offence punishable under Section 78(3) of Karnataka Police Act, 1963 and Section 112(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending on the file Additional Civil Judge and JMFC at Chincholi, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE SWK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27 CT-BH