[Cites 17, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Srinivas And Anr vs The State Of Karnataka And Anr on 11 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
CRL.P No. 200278 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 200571 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200278 OF 2023
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200571 OF 2023
IN CRL.P No. 200278/2023
BETWEEN:
1. GURUNATHREDDY
S/O VEERAREDDY HUVINABAVI
AGE: 60 YEARS
OCC: RETIRED GOVT SERVANT
2. SIDDALINGREDDY
Digitally signed by S/O GURUNATHREDDY HUVINBAVI
SHIVALEELA
DATTATRAYA AGE: 29 YEARS
UDAGI
Location: HIGH OCC: BUSINESS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
BOTH ARE R/O SULEPET, TQ:CHINCHOLI,
DIST: KALABURAGI-85307
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI B C JAKA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THORUGH SULEPET POLICE STATION,
TQ: CHINCHOLI DIST: KALABURAGI-585307
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
CRL.P No. 200278 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 200571 of 2023
HC-KAR
NEW REPRESENTED BY ADDL.SPP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH-585107
2. SHRINIVAS S/O TIPPANNA BADIGER
AGED ABOUT: 46 YEARS
OCC: ADVOCATE
R/AT SULEPET, TQ: CHINCHOLI
DIST: KALABURAGI-585307
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA B YADAV, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI SANJAY KULKARNI ADV., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C.
PRAYING TO QUASH PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1239/2022, ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC CHINCHOLI
FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/SEC. 323, 324, 354, 504,
506 R/W 34 OF IPC, ARISING OUT OF CHARGE SHEET FILED IN
CRIME NO.55/2022 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT
SULEPET POLICE, TQ. CHINCHOLI, AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS, TO SECURE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND TO
PREVENT ABUSE OF PROCESS OF THE COURT.
IN CRL.P NO. 200571/2023
BETWEEN:
1. SRINIVAS S/O TIPPANNA BADIGER
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: ADVOCATE,
R/O SULEPETH VILLAGE,
TQ. CHINCHOLI, DIST. KALABURAGI-585325.
2. VIVEKANAND S/O TIPPANNA BADIGER
AGED: 55 YEARS,
R/O SULEPETH VILLAGE, TQ. CHINCHOLI,
DIST.KALABURAGI-585325.
...PETITIONERS
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
CRL.P No. 200278 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 200571 of 2023
HC-KAR
(BY SRI SANJAY KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE PSI,
SULEPETH P.S., KALABURGI
REP. BY ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALBURAGI, KALABURAGI-585101.
2. SMT. PUSHPAVATI
W/O GURUNATH REDDY HUVINABAVI
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O SULEPETH VILLAGE, TQ. CHINCHOLI
DIST. KALABURAGI-585325.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GOPAL KRISHNA B YADAV, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. B.C. JAKA ADV., FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT
DATED 27.06.2022 IN CRIME NO.56/2022 AND QUASH THE
CHARGE SHEET IN C.C.NO.1242/2022 FILED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT POLICE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS HEREIN
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 341, 323, 324, 354,
504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND ALSO QUASH ALL THE
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED
4.11.2022 PASSED BY THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,
AT CHINCHOLI IN C.C.NO.1242/2022 I.E. ORDER OF
TAKING COGNIZANCE AND ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS TO
THE PETITIONERS HEREIN FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
U/S 341, 323, 324, 354, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC, WHICH
IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC AT CHINCHOLI.
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
CRL.P No. 200278 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 200571 of 2023
HC-KAR
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
These two petitions are filed to quash the
proceedings in C.C.No.1239/2022, arising out of Crime
No.55/2022, registered by Sulepet Police, Kalaburagi, for
the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 354,
504, and 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and C.C.No.1242/2022
arising out of Crime No.56/2022 registered by Sulepet
police, Kalaburagi, for the offences punishable under
Sections 341, 323, 324, 354, 504 and 506 r/w Section 34
of IPC, both pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge
and JMFC at Chincholi.
2. These two case and counter case have been
filed by respondent No.2 in both the petitions and in both
the petitions respondent No.1-Police have laid charge
sheet and learned Magistrate took cognizance of the
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
HC-KAR
offences. Hence, the petitioners approached this Court to
quash the proceedings.
3. During the course of argument, today learned
counsel for the respective parties in both the petitions filed
an application under Section 359 r/w Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and submit that
the parties have amicably settled their dispute. The
application is accompanied with the affidavit of both the
respondent No.2 and petitioners in both the petitions.
4. I have perused the compromise petition and the
affidavit.
5. Though the offence punishable under Section
324 invoked in both the cases is not compoundable in
nature, however, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Laxmi Narayan reported
in 2019 5 SCC 688 held in para No.13 as under:
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
HC-KAR
"13. Considering the law on the point and the
other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to
hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:
i) that the power conferred under
Section 482 of the Code to quash the
criminal proceedings for the non-
compoundable offences under Section 320
of the Code can be exercised having
overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil
character, particularly those arising out of
commercial transactions or arising out of
matrimonial relationship or family disputes
and when the parties have resolved the
entire dispute amongst themselves;
ii) such power is not to be exercised in
those prosecutions which involved heinous
and serious offences of mental depravity or
offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.
Such offences are not private in nature and
have a serious impact on society;
iii) similarly, such power is not to be
exercised for the offences under the special
statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or
the offences committed by public servants
while working in that capacity are not to be
quashed merely on the basis of compromise
between the victim and the offender;
iv) offences under Section 307 IPC and
the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category
of heinous and serious offences and
therefore are to be treated as crime against
the society and not against the individual
alone, and therefore, the criminal
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
HC-KAR
proceedings for the offence under Section
307 IPC and/or the Arms Act etc. which
have a serious impact on the society cannot
be quashed in exercise of powers under
Section 482 of the Code, on the ground
that the parties have resolved their entire
dispute amongst themselves. However, the
High Court would not rest its decision
merely because there is a mention of
Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is
framed under this provision. It would be
open to the High Court to examine as to
whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is
there for the sake of it or the prosecution
has collected sufficient evidence, which if
proved, would lead to framing the charge
under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it
would be open to the High Court to go by
the nature of injury sustained, whether
such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate
parts of the body, nature of weapons used
etc. However, such an exercise by the High
Court would be permissible only after the
evidence is collected after investigation and
the charge sheet is filed/charge is framed
and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not
permissible when the matter is still under
investigation.
Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in
paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of
this Court in the case of Narinder Singh
(supra) should be read harmoniously and to
be read as a whole and in the
circumstances stated hereinabove;
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
HC-KAR
v) while exercising the power under
Section 482 of the Code to quash the
criminal proceedings in respect of non-
compoundable offences, which are private
in nature and do not have a serious impart
on society, on the ground that there is a
settlement/compromise between the victim
and the offender, the High Court is required
to consider the antecedents of the accused;
the conduct of the accused, namely,
whether the accused was absconding and
why he was absconding, how he had
managed with the complainant to enter into
a compromise etc."
6. In view of the above judgment and as the
dispute is purely private in nature and do not have any
serious impact on the society, I am of the considered view
that the compromise may be accepted. Accordingly, I
proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Petitions are allowed.
(ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.1239/2022,
arising out of Crime No.55/2022, registered
by Sulepet Police, Kalaburagi, for the
offences punishable under Sections 323,
NC: 2026:KHC-K:1351
HC-KAR
324, 354, 504, and 506 r/w Section 34 of
IPC and proceedings in C.C.No.1242/2022
arising out of Crime No.56/2022 registered
by Sulepet police, Kalaburagi, for the
offences punishable under Sections 341,
323, 324, 354, 504 and 506 r/w Section 34
of IPC, both pending on the file of Additional
Civil Judge and JMFC at Chincholi, against
respective petitioners/accused are hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
SWK
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17
CT-BH
