Karnataka High Court
Sri Munianjanappa vs State By on 10 June, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:19750
CRL.P No. 1123 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1123 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. SRI MUNIANJANAPPA
S/O PATELAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MADAPPANAHALLI VILLAGE,
HESARAGHATTA HOBLI,
BENGALURU - 560 089.
2. N.K.LAKSHMANA MURTHY
S/O LATE KESHAVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.38, 3RD CROSS,
MUNIVERAPPA LAYOUT,
Digitally
signed by SHAMPURA
NAGAVENI BENGALURU - 560 032.
Location: ...PETITIONERS
High Court
of Karnataka (BY SRI VENKATACHALAPATHI S.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY
D.J. HALLI POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU CITY
REPRESENTED BY LEARNED,
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:19750
CRL.P No. 1123 of 2024
HC-KAR
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. SRI UDAYBHASKAR J.V.,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
POLICE INSPECTOR
FRAUD AND MISAPPROPRIATION SQUAD,
C.C.B BENGALURU
BENGALURU - 560 023.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI P.TEJESH, HCGP FOR R-1)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DATED
25.12.2012, FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 D.J.HALLI P.S.
IN CR.NO.240/2011 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED
XI A.C.M.M COURT MAYO HALL AT BENGALURU IN
C.C.NO.50553/2013 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 420 R/W 34 OF
IPC AND SEC.119 OF KARNATAKA EDUCATION 1995.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners - accused 4 and 13 are at the doors of
this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.
No.50553/2013, pending before the XI Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mayo Hall, Bengaluru.
NC: 2025:KHC:19750
HC-KAR
2. Heard Sri S.K.Venkatachalapathi, learned counsel for
petitioners and Sri P. Tejesh, learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent No.1.
3. Learned counsel appearing to the petitioners submits
that qua the other accused, on the same allegations, a
coordinate bench has quashed the proceedings against -
accused Nos.6 to 8 in Crl.P.No.3300/2017, disposed on
24.02.2022 and following the same, this Court has quashed the
proceedings against accused Nos.1, 5 and 11 in
Crl.P.No.2989/2022, disposed on 27.07.2022. He would submit
that as the issue standing answered by the judgments rendered
by the coordinate bench and followed by this Court, the
unmistakable inference would be, obliteration of the
proceedings.
4. Learned High Court Government Pleader would not
dispute the position of law; the identical circumstance and
afore-quoted judgments rendered by the coordinate bench and
this Court following the same.
NC: 2025:KHC:19750
HC-KAR
5. This Court in Crl.P.No.2989/2022, disposed on
27.07.2022, has held as follows:
7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The
petitioners herein are accused Nos.1, 5 and 11. The Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court while considering the case in
respect of other accused persons in respect of the same
incident, in Crl.P.No.3300/2017 by order 24.02.2022, has
observed as under:
"6. Admittedly, the Police on credible
information went to the place of the incident and
found that the accused were preparing answer to
the questions in a small chits so as to help the
students who were appearing for the II year
nursing examination and seized the bus in which
the said incident has taken place by drawing the
mahazar on the very same day. The offence alleged
against the petitioners are cognizable offence for
which no preliminary enquiry is required to be held.
On receiving credible information the Police
Inspector should have taken steps immediately to
register the FIR as required under Section 156 of
Cr.P.C., particularly on receiving credible
information with regard to commission of
cognizable offence. The Apex Court in the
case of Lalitha Kumari supra, has held that,
registration of FIR mandatory under Section 154 of
the Code, if the information received discloses
commission of cognizable offence and no
preliminary enquiry is permissible in such a
situation. Hence, the registration of the impugned
FIR is vitiated."
In view of the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court quashing proceedings against other accused
persons, the petitioners herein are also entitled for the
similar relief, on parity, as is granted in the afore-quoted
judgment."
NC: 2025:KHC:19750
HC-KAR
In that light, the petitioners - accused Nos.4 and 13 are
also entitled for the similar relief, on parity, as is granted in the
afore-quoted judgments.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.
ii) Impugned proceedings in C.C. No.50553/2013,
arising out of Crime No.240/2011, pending on the
file of the XI A.C.M.M. at Mayo Hall, Bengaluru,
stand quashed qua the petitioners.
I.A.No.1/2024 is disposed, as a consequence.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
NVJ
