Karnataka High Court
Mr. Manjunatha vs State Of Karnataka on 3 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:39395
WP No. 30142 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
WRIT PETITION NO. 30142 OF 2025 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. MR. MANJUNATHA
S/O B K MOHAN
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT O S M ROAD
BHADRAVATHI
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 227.
2. MR. BASAVA
S/O SANGAMESHWAR
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
R/AT O S M ROAD, BHADRAVATHI
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 227.
3. MR. RAVI KUMAR
S/O K M MOHAN
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
Digitally signed
by NANDINI R R/AT O S M ROAD, BHADRAVATHI
Location: SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 227.
HIGH COURT
OF 4. MR. UMAR KHAN
KARNATAKA S/O SAMIVULLA KHAN
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/AT MADHAVA NAGARA
NEAR MEENA NURSING HOME
HOSAMENE BHADRAVATHI
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577227.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. M.S.SHYAM SUNDAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. VANDANA P.L., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:39395
WP No. 30142 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY BHADRAVATHI OLD TOWN P S
REPRESENTED BY HCGP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. SRI. NAKUL REVENKAR
S/O JAGADEESH K. REVENKAR
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
KANAKA NAGARA
3RD CROSS, BHADARAVATHI
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 227.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. LAKSHMAN, HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET IN S.C.NO.5066/2021 ARISING OUT
OF COMPLAINT DATED 01.03.2021 AND FIR IN CRIME
NO.23/2021 OF BHADRAVATI OLD TOWN P.S. FOR THE
ALLEGED OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 504,
506, 149, 307, 147 AND 143 OF IPC ARRAIGNING THE
PRESENT PETITIONERS AS ACCUSED NO.3, 4, 5 AND 14
RESPECTIVELY, PENDING ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE IV ADDL.
DISTRICT JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA SITTING AT BHADRAVATHI
(VIDE ANNEXURE -A, B AND C) AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:39395
WP No. 30142 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submits that pertaining to an incident that took place on
28.02.2021 at about 10.30 pm, an FIR came to be
registered at 01.30 am on 01.03.2021 for the offences
punishable under Sections 143, 147, 307, 323, 504, 506
and 507 read with Section 149 of IPC in Cr.No.23/2021 of
Bhadravathi Old Town PS. Thereafter, some people visited
the hospital where the injured were taking treatment and
a scuffle ensued. Another complaint was lodged at 01.45
am, which was registered in Non-Cognizable Case
No.109/2021 of Old Town PS, Bhadravathi and later, after
obtaining the permission from the Magistrate, converted
as Cr.No.26/2021. It is submitted that Cr.No.26/2021 has
been stayed by this Court in W.P.No.23571/2025. He
further submits that the incident that took place at 10.30
pm and the incident that took place in the hospital at
NC: 2025:KHC:39395
HC-KAR
01.45 am are pertaining to the same transaction and
therefore, the Investigating Officer could not have filed
two separate charge sheets in respect of the same.
3. The perusal of the records reveal that in respect
of Kabaddi Tournament, there was an incident at 10.30
pm, where certain people were injured. When they were
taken to the hospital and were taking treatment, another
set of people including the local MLA visited the hospital
where one more scuffle took place resulting in a Non-
Cognizable Case No.109/2021 and later, converted to
Cr.No.26/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections
323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.
4. Evidently, Cr.No.26/2021, which pertains to the
incident that took place in the hospital at 01.45 am, has
been stayed by this Court. It is relevant to note that there
cannot be any dispute that the two incidents are
pertaining to the Kabaddi Tournament and that took place
one after the other in continuity. This aspect is not
disputed by the prosecution.
NC: 2025:KHC:39395
HC-KAR
5. If the charges are framed in the charge sheet
filed in respect of Cr.No.23/2021 (regarding the incident
that took place at 10.30 pm on 28.02.2021), result in two
different trials for the offence, which had taken place in
continuity.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
relies on the judgment in the case of ANJU CHAUDHARY
VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER1 in this
regard. Since the trial in Cr.No.26/2021 has been stayed,
the trial in Cr.No.23/2021 may have to suffer, if the Court
comes to the conclusion that the trial in Cr.No.26/2021 is
also to be held along with trial in Cr.No.23/2021.
7. In that view of the matter, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners is at liberty to make a
submission to the trial Court, which is holding the trial in
Cr.No.23/2021 to wait for sometime. The trial Court may
have to wait till the disposal of WP.No.23571/2025.
(2023) 6 SCC 384
NC: 2025:KHC:39395
HC-KAR
8. On such submission being made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the trial Court may consider
the same and also the effect of the judgment of the Apex
Court in the case of ANJU CHAUDHARY (Supra).
9. The petition is disposed of with such directions.
Sd/-
(C M JOSHI)
JUDGE
NR/-
