Karnataka High Court
Abdulkhadar Jilan S/O Noor Mahamad vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 June, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
CRL.P No. 103593 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103593 OF 2024
(482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS)
BETWEEN:
ABDULKHADAR JILAN
S/O. NOOR MAHAMAD,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. WARD NO.14,
MADEENA MANJIL,
KGN BRICKS TEACHERS COLONY,
HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
TQ. HAGARIBOMMANAHALLI,
DIST. VIJAYANAGARA 583 212.
Digitally signed by
RAKESH S
HARIHAR
Location: High
Court of ...PETITIONER
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench (BY SRI SAJEED AKHIL TAMBOOLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HOSAPETE TOWN P.S.,
TQ. HOSAPETE, DIST. BALLARI,
REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
DHARWAD 580 011.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
CRL.P No. 103593 of 2024
HC-KAR
2. KUMARI. MABUNNI
D/O. LATE K. S. JALEELSAB,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OCC: TEACHER,
R/O. WARD NO.11,
MUSLIM PLOT,
MARIYAMMANA HALLI,
TQ. HOSAPETE,
DIST. BALLARI 583 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ABHISHEK MALLIPATIL, H.C.G.P. , FOR R-1, &
NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)
***
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF THE CR.P.C. (528 OF THE BNSS, 2023), PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 10.08.2020 PASSED BY PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. JUDGE, HOSAPETE, IN C.C.
NO.11 OF 2020, THEREBY TAKING COGNIZANCE FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 498A, 323, 504,
506 AND 306 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF THE IPC, AFTER
COMMITTAL, THE SAME IS NUMBERED AS S.C. NO.5054 OF
2021 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS COURT, HOSAPETE, AND QUASH ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS IN S.C. NO.5054 OF 2021 AND ALLOW THE
CRIMINAL PETITION AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED
NO.10, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
CRL.P No. 103593 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)
The petitioner/accused No.10 has filed this criminal
petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') to quash the entire
proceedings in Criminal Case No.11 of 2020 on the file of
the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Hosapete, now committed to the III Additional
District and Sessions Court, Hosapete, in Sessions Case
No.5054 of 2021, for the offences punishable under
Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 306 read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC').
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:
On 14.9.2011, Sumaiya (hereinafter referred to as
deceased) was given in marriage to accused No.1 and
accused Nos.2 to 4 are the relatives of accused No.1. They
used to harass the deceased physically and mentally and
hence, the deceased committed suicide on 27.05.2020.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
HC-KAR
Hence, the sister of the deceased lodged a complaint,
which led to registration of First Information Report and
investigation.
3. The Investigating Officer, after completion of
investigation, filed the charge-sheet against the accused
persons for the aforesaid offences.
4. Taking exception to the same, the petitioner has
filed this petition.
5. Heard Sri Sajeed Akhil Tambooli, learned counsel
for the petitioner, and Sri Abhishek Mallipatil, learned High
Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1-State.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended
that the petitioner is no where connected to the offence.
The entire allegation is against accused No.1 and not
against the petitioner. However, the contents of F.I.R.,
complaint and other investigation material show that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case with
motive. Further, there is no material placed on record to
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
HC-KAR
attract the alleged offence. The charge-sheet material
does not disclose the commission of alleged offence.
Hence, cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is
without any substance. Hence, he prayed to allow the
petition.
7. Per contra, the learned High Court Government
Pleader for respondent No.1-State has contended that the
charge-sheet material clearly discloses the commission of
the aforesaid offence and the veracity of allegations
against the petitioner can be considered only after a full
fledged trial. Moreover, the present petition has been filed
at the stage, when the Court took cognizance and issued
process, whereas the trial Court has framed charges
against the accused persons and now, the matter is set
down for trial before the trial Court. Once charge is
framed, the petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is
not maintainable. Hence, he prayed to reject the petition.
8. Perused the material available on record. The
alleged offence took place on 27.05.2020 and the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
HC-KAR
complaint was lodged on 28.05.2020. As per the contents
of the charge-sheet, the petitioner also abetted the
deceased in commission of the offence, and hence, the
deceased committed suicide.
9. Learned High Court Government Pleader
contended that, now the trial Court has framed charges
against the accused persons and the matter is set down
for trial. This aspect is not disputed by the learned counsel
for the petitioner. Therefore, framing of charges signifies
that the Court after perusing the charge-sheet material
believes that there are sufficient reasons to proceed with
the trial.
The Hon'ble Apex Court in several judgments held
that, once the charges are framed and the matter is set
down for trial, the Courts must slow in quashing the
criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., or
the Courts generally reluctant to interfere with the trial
process, after charges are framed, unless there are
exceptional circumstances. In this case, the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:7808
HC-KAR
petitioner/accused No.10 has not shown any such
exceptional circumstances so as to quash the entire
proceedings against him. Further, in this case, the
petitioner has disputed the question of fact. Therefore, this
Court cannot dwell into disputed question of fact without
exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
The matter is set down for trial. There is no merit in this
petition. Accordingly the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
KVK
