[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sangamesh Ghanti vs The State on 10 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
CRL.P No. 202049 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 202049 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SANGAMESH GHANTI
S/O MALLINATH GHANTI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
OCC BUSINESS
R/O SHIVANAGAR NORTH
BIDAR - 585401
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. VAISHNAVI CHANDA ADV., AND
Digitally signed by SRI. RAVI B PATIL, ADVOCATE)
SHIVALEELA
DATTATRAYA
UDAGI
Location: HIGH
AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
1. THE STATE
THROUGH NEW TOWN
POLICE STATION BIDAR
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AT KALABURAGI
2. SUNIL S/O GUNDAPPA CHILLARAGI
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
OCC ASSISTANT ENGINEER
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
CRL.P No. 202049 of 2025
HC-KAR
PWD DEPARTMENT
R/O PLOT NO.55,
H.NO.19-2-466/2B
SY NO.48/2B, 1,2,3,4,5 AND 6
SIDDAREDDY LAYOUT
NEAR LIC COLONY,
BIDAR - 585401
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VEERANAGOUDA MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (OLD), U/SEC.
528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO A) QUASH THE IMPUGNED
PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.737/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT BIDAR FOR
THE OFFENCE UNDER SEC.504 AND 506 R/W 34 OF INDIAN
PENAL CODE ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 208/2023 OF NEW
TOWN POLICE STATION, BIDAR, AS ILLEGAL AND ONE
WITHOUT JURISDICTION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
This criminal petition is filed under Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash
proceedings against petitioner/accused No.2 in
C.C.No.737/2025, arising out of Crime No.208/2023,
registered by New Town Police, Bidar, for the offences
punishable under Sections 504 and 506 r/w Section 34 of
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
IPC, presently pending on the file of II-Addl. Senior Civil
Judge and JMFC, Bidar.
2. The factual matrix of the case is that,
respondent No.2, the father of accused No.1-Vineetha,
lodged a missing complaint of his daughter on 16.05.2023,
which came to be registered in Crime No.75/2023 and on
21.05.2023, respondent No.1-Police traced his daughter at
Hyderabad along with accused No.2/petitioner. During the
course of her interrogation, she stated that they were in
love and the said fact was known to both the families,
since both families opposed their relationship, they left
their house and she is residing along with accused No.2 at
Hyderabad. Accordingly, respondent No.1-Police after
recording their statements; let them free.
3. It is further case of respondent No.2 that, after
three months from the said incident, a criminal case has
been registered against the petitioner in Crime
No.176/2023 by Gandhi Gunj Police, Bidar, for the
offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 506 of
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
IPC. As such, accused No.1 left his company and went to
Hyderabad and joined in her earlier company for work.
4. On 03.12.2023 accused No.1 allegedly called
respondent No.2, complaining about her ill health and
expressed her willingness to join her parents. Therefore,
respondent No.2 had brought her to his house on
04.12.2023. Subsequently, it was come to his knowledge
that the petitioner deceived her, committed fraud on her
and took her to Hyderabad. Accordingly, he lodged a
complaint against him before respondent No.1-Police.
5. In the meantime, accused No.1 took a u-turn
and refused to give any statement or complaint against
the petitioner. As such, respondent No.2 came to know
that both accused Nos.1 and 2 are making an attempt to
knock out his property. Hence, on such apprehension, he
lodged the present complaint on 12.12.2023. On the
strength of the said complaint, respondent No.1-Police
registered the case in Crime No.208/2023 for the
aforementioned offences. After completing the
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
investigation, respondent No.1-Police laid charge-sheet
against accused Nos.1 and 2 by arraying this petitioner as
accused No.2. Learned Magistrate took the cognizance of
the offences. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has
filed this petition to quash the proceedings against him.
6. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and
learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent
No.1-State. Though notice is served to respondent No.2,
he remained absent.
7. Apart from urging several contentions, learned
counsel for the petitioner primarily contented that,
accused No.1-daughter of respondent No.2 left his
company and voluntarily joined the company of petitioner
by leaving her parental house and started to reside along
with him at Hyderabad. The earlier FIR registered against
petitioner in Crime No.176/2023 by the Bidar Police is no
way connected to the present complaint and it was by a
third person. Further, the present complaint is lodged with
an imaginary ground that the petitioner and accused No.1
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
are making an attempt to claim the property of respondent
No.2. As such, no prima facie materials forthcoming
against the petitioner in the charge sheet. Hence, prays to
allow the petition.
8. Per contra, learned High Court Government
Pleader opposed the prayer and contended that, now the
investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been laid
against the petitioner and statement of witnesses have
been recorded. Hence, prays to dismiss the petition.
9. I have given my anxious consideration both on
the submission made by the learned counsel for the
respective parties and the documents available on record.
10. As could be gathered from the complaint and
other records, on perusal of the entire complaint
averments, absolutely there are no iota of allegations
made against this petitioner that he has committed the
offences under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC. The specific
case of respondent No.2 is that, his daughter-accused
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
No.1 left his company and joined the petitioner and they
both stayed together at Hyderabad and she intends to
marry him. She has not lodged any complaint against this
petitioner about his harassment or in any other respect.
Admittedly, she is major. The allegations in the complaint
are that a case has been registered against this petitioner
at Bidar on the strength of complaint lodged by some third
party. The said incident is no way connected to the
present case.
11. On close scrutiny of complaint, it appears that
this complaint has been lodged by respondent No.2 on the
apprehension that his daughter and this petitioner may
claim a share in his property. However, even in the
complaint averments, the petitioner at no point of time
either abused or threatened respondent No.2. In such
circumstances, the ingredients of Section 504 and 506
absolutely do not attract against this petitioner. Despite,
the respondent No.1-Police mechanically filed charge sheet
against the petitioner.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
12. It is by now well settled that continuation of the
criminal proceedings against any person on the basis of a
frivolous or vexatious complaint is something very serious.
This would tarnish the image of the person against whom
false, frivolous and vexatious allegations are leveled. The
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mohammad Wajid v.
State of U.P. reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 951,
held that whenever an accused comes before the Court
invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of
constitution to get the FIR or criminal proceedings
quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings
are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such
circumstance, Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with
care and a little more closely. It will not be just enough for
the Court to look into the averments made in the
FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining
whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
alleged offence are disclosed or not. On the other hand,
the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending
circumstance emerging from the record of the case over
and above the averments and, if need be, with due care
and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The
Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C (528 of BNSS) or Article 226 of Constitution need
not restrict itself only to the stage of a case, but is
empowered to take into a count the overall circumstances
leading to the initiation/registration of the case as well as
the materials collected in the course of investigation.
13. I am of the considered view that, even if the
entire allegations in the FIR and charge sheet are taken
into consideration on its face value, no case has been
made out against the petitioner for the offences he has
been charge sheeted. Hence, continuation of proceedings
against the petitioner is abuse of process of Court.
14. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1311
HC-KAR
ORDER
i. The petition is allowed.
ii. The proceedings against the
petitioner/accused No.2 in
C.C.No.737/2025, arising out of Crime
No.208/2023, registered by New Town
Police, Bidar, for the offences punishable
under Sections 504 and 506 r/w Section
34 of IPC, presently pending on the file of
II-Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC,
Bidar, is hereby quashed.
Sd/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
SDU
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 7
CT-BH
