Karnataka High Court
Venkateshalu. K vs The State Of Karnataka on 6 June, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
CRL.P No. 2607 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2607 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
1. VENKATESHALU. K,
S/O LATE B. KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO.6, 4TH B CROSS,
NEAR VINAYAKA TEMPLE, VINAYAKANAGAR,
KAMAKSHIPALYA, MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
BASAVESHWARANAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 079.
2. SATHISHGOWDA @ SIDDARUDHA. M. J.
S/O JOGI GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 5, 10TH MAIN, 7TH CROSS,
Digitally signed NEAR HMR SCHOOL, JNANAJYOTHINAGAR,
by NAGAVENI
BENGALURU - 560 056.
Location: High
Court of ...PETITIONERS
Karnataka
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH M.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY TAVAREKERE P.S, RAMANAGARA.
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
CRL.P No. 2607 of 2025
HC-KAR
2. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY,
S/O MUNIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT NO.31, 3RD CROSS,
SHANKARAPPA GARDEN,
MAGADI MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 023.
...RESPONDENTS
`(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528
BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
CC.NO.2726/2021 FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION
323, 420, 504, 506, 34 OF IPC REGISTERED BY TAVAREKERE
P.S., RAMANAGARA DISTRICT IN CR.NO.93/2021 (PCR
NO.188/2020) SO FOR AS THE PETITIONERS IS CONCERNED
PENDING ON THE FILE OF 2ND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
COURT, MAGADI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners are accused Nos.3 & 5. The Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 31.10.2023 in
Crl.P Nos.6719/2022 and connected matters, had quashed the
proceedings qua accused Nos.1 & 2 by the following order:
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
HC-KAR
"The petitioners who are common in all these
petitions are sought to be prosecuted for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 420, 506 504 r/w
Section 34 of IPC.
2. The Defacto complainant in all these petitions
lodged the FIRs alleging that, accused No.1 though not
the owner of the property bearing Sy.No.28 measuring 5
acres 14 guntas plus (3 guntas of Kharab) situated at
Varthur, Narsipura Village Tavarekere Bangalore South
Taluk, Bangalore, executed power of attorney in favour
of accused No.4 Ravikumar for dealing with the property
to an extent of 20 guntas in Sy.No.28. Accused No.4 in
turn executed registered agreement of sale in favour of
accused No.5 who purportedly formed a residential
layout in the said extent of 20 guntas and conveyed 48
sites measuring 30 feet X 40 feet to the de facto
complainants and others.
3. Though the sale deeds had been executed in
favour of the defacto-complainants, the accused No.1
and 2 came to the sites and objected to the enjoyment
of the sites by the defacto complainants. Thereafter,
accused No.1 to 4 colluding with each other hatched a
plan to grab sites belonging to the defacto complainant
by trespassing into the sites and when questioned,
accused Nos.1 and 2 are said to have stated that the 20
guntas of land belongs to them. The police after
conducting an investigation submitted the charges
sheets.
4. The summary of the charge sheets is that,
Accused No.1 purchased the land measuring 5 acres 14
guntas + 3 guntas Kharab land through a registered sale
deed dated 31.03.2016 from M/s DLF housing Company,
and thereafter the petitioner executed a power of
attorney in favour of accused No.4 on 16.02.2017 for an
extent of 20 guntas, and in turn accused No.4 as a GPA
holder executed an agreement of sale in favour of
accused No.5 conveying 20 guntas of land in Sy.No.28.
Thereafter the accused No.4 and 5 have executed
registered sale deeds in favour of the defacto
complainant and others conveying 48 sites measuring
30 X 40 for valuable sale consideration.
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
HC-KAR
5. The accused No.1 after executing the power of
attorney has conveyed the entire extent of land
including the 20 guntas of land in favour of accused
No.2 by executing registered gift deed dated
30.03.2017.
6. Accused Nos.1 to 5 in collusion with each other
and with a common intention of cheating the defacto
complainant after receiving the sale consideration are
claiming that the 20 guntas of land belong to Accused
Nos.1 & 2.
7. The cognizance taken of the aforesaid offences is
impugned in these petitions.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner would make the
following submissions:
Firstly, the perusal of the signature of the accused
No.1 on the absolute sale deed dated 31.03.2016 and
the GPA would clearly establish that the accused No.4 by
forging the signature of accused No.1 has created GPA
and thereafter conveyed the 20 guntas of land in favour
of accused No.5.
Secondly, the sites are allegedly conveyed by
accused Nos. 4 and 5 as GPA holder and agreement
holder, and accused No.1 and 2 are neither parties nor
signatories to the sale deeds executed in favour of the
defacto complainants, and in the absence of any privity
of contract, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted for the
offences alleged against them.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2-
defacto-complainants would submit that the accused
No.1 having conveyed the plots to the de facto-
complainants through registered sale deeds executed in
their favour by the GPA Holder with an intention to
defraud the de facto-complainants has gifted the with
entire extent of land including 20 guntas of land in
favour of the accused No.2. Consequently, the accused
No.4 and 5 as GPA holder and the agreement holder
have cheated the de facto complainants either by not
handing over the possession of the plots formed in 20
guntas of land or with an intention to cheat have
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
HC-KAR
conveyed the plots to 3rd parties. Accused No.1 who is
the principal is liable for all the illegal acts of the agent
namely accused No.4, and the accused No.1 cannot be
absolved of criminal liability.
10. Learned HCGP for the respondent-State would
submit that the charge sheet material clearly discloses
the commission of the cognizable offences alleged
against the petitioners herein and the veracity of the
allegations can be considered at the time of the trial and
the same cannot be gone into.
11. Considered the submissions of the learned
counsel for the parties.
12. An extent of 5 acres 14 guntas of land in
Sy.No.28 was purchased by the petitioner-accused No.1
under the registered sale deed dated 31.03.2016
executed by M/s DFL housing Company represented by
its partners. The case of the prosecution is that, the
petitioner-accused No.1 has executed a power of
attorney dated 16.2.2017 in favour of the accused No.4
to deal with 20 guntas of land in Sy.No.28 and the
clause contained in the power of attorney discloses that
the accused No.1 was entrusted with the responsibility
to sell the portion of the land/ lease/mortgage the
schedule property or in part and for on behalf of accused
No.1 and to execute appropriate registered sale deeds
and to receive sale consideration there upon.
13. In terms of the power of attorney granted,
accused No.4 entered into an agreement of sale dated
28.3.2017 in favour of accused No.5. Perusal of the
agreement of sale discloses that the 20 guntas of land
was said have been conveyed to accused No.5 subject to
certain terms and conditions for a sum of Rs.40 Lakhs
out of which a sum of Rs.5 Lakh was received by
accused No.4, and the balance sale consideration was to
be paid at the time of registration of the sale deeds in
favour of accused No.5.
14. In terms of the registered GPA and registered
sale agreement dated 20.8.2017, accused No.4 as
power of attorney of accused No.1 and accused No.5 as
2nd party developer executed registered sale deeds in
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
HC-KAR
favour of the defacto complainants conveying plots
measuring 30 X 40.
15. The case of the prosecution is that, the accused
after having formed plots in 20 guntas of land have
executed multiple sale deeds in respect of each of the
plots to make wrongful gain at the expense of the de
facto complainants.
16. Whether the GPA was created by accused No.4
cannot be gone into in these petitions, and the same can
be adjudicated by the Civil Court in the pending suits
filed by accused No.1 against the accused Nos. 4 and 5
for declaration and permanent injunction wherein it is
alleged that the accused No.4 by forging the signature
of accused No.1 had created power of attorney and
thereafter, the said accused along with accused No.5
have fraudulently conveyed the plots to the de facto
complainants.
17. The accused No.4 under the alleged GPA was
authorized to deal with 20 guntas of land, however it is
alleged that the accused No.4 and 5 have executed
multiple sale deeds in respect of each plot. In the
absence of any material that the petitioners connived
with the accused No.4 and 5 to cheat the defacto
complainant, the petitioners cannot be held responsible
for any act of Accused No.4 if he has exceeded the
authority give, since they are neither the parties nor the
signatories to the sale deeds.
18. The essential elements to constitute the
commission of the offences alleged against the
petitioners are conspicuously absent. Therefore, the
continuation of the criminal proceedings will be an abuse
of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:-
ORDER
i. The petitions are allowed.
ii. The impugned proceedings in C.C.Nos.2761/2021,
2774/2021, 2753/2021, 2734/2021, 2776/2021,
2770/2021, 2768/2021, 2733/2021, 2773/2021,
2769/2021, 2756/2021, 2777/2021, 2764/2021,
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
HC-KAR
2726/2021, 2754/2021, 2767/2021, 2738/2021,
2732/2021, 2763/2021, 2758/2021, 2725/2021,
2775/2021, 2765/2021, 2766/2021, 2760/2021,
2752/2021, 2719/2021, 2771/2021, 2757/2021,
pending on the file of II Addl. Civil Judge and
J.M.F.C, Magadi, insofar it relates to petitioners
herein, are hereby quashed.
It is made clear, this court has not adjudicated the
validity of the alleged power of attorney executed by
accused No.1 in favour of accused No.4, and the Trial
Court in pending suit filed by the accused No.1 is at
liberty to adjudicate the same without being influenced
by any observations made in this order, and the
observation made, if any, is only for the purpose of the
present petitions.
All contentions are kept open."
2. This Court had issued notice to the complainant on the
score that without hearing the complainant, the order could not
be passed notwithstanding the fact that issue stood covered by
the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge of this
Court. The police report indicates that complainant is no more.
Therefore, on hearing the Addl. SPP for the State, I deem it
appropriate to grant the same benefit to accused Nos.3 & 5 as
granted to accused Nos.1 & 2 in terms of the order passed by
the Co-ordinate Bench of this court supra. Hence, I pass the
following:
NC: 2025:KHC:19279
HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed;
(ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.2726/2021 arising
out of Crime No.93/2021 (PCR No.188/2020),
registered by Tavarekere Police Station,
pending on the file of 2nd Addl. Civil Judge &
JMFC Court, Magadi, Ramanagara District, are
quashed insofar as petitioners are concerned.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
YN
CT: BHK
