[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Smt. Malathi Nagaraj Shetty vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 February, 2026
Author: S Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
CRL.P No. 12899 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12899 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. MALATHI NAGARAJ SHETTY
W/O SRI NAGARAJ SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.
2. SRI NITHISH SHETTY @
NITHS SHETTY (AS PER FIR)
S/O NAGARAJ SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS.
3. SRI AVIK SAGAR SHETTY
@ AVIK SHETTY (AS PER FIR)
S/O SRI NAGARAJ SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS.
PETITIONER NO.1 TO 3
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
NO.225, SURYA RESIDENCY
6TH MAIN, 4TH LBOCK
Digitally
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.
signed by
NANDINI M S
4. SHREYAS A
Location:
HIGH COURT S/O ASHOK P.R.
OF AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
KARNATAKA
R/AT NO.1107, 26TH MAIN
35TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 4TH T BLOCK
BANGALORE - 560 011.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI VENKATESH S ARBATTI, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY
THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
JAYANGAR POLICE STATION
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
CRL.P No. 12899 of 2024
HC-KAR
BANGALORE - 570 048
REPRESENTED BY STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT BUILIDNG
BANGALOLRE - 5600001.
2. ANAND V.M
S/O SRI MALLESH
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
NO.225, SURYA RESIDENCY
6TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK
JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 011.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1;
SRI HARISHA J, ADV., FOR R-2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS)
PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED 08.06.2024
(ANNEXURE-A) FIR DATED 08.06.2024 IN CR.NO.202/2024
(ANNEXURE-B) CHARGE SHEET DATED 05.08.2024(ANNEXURE-C)
THE ORDER DATED 17.08.2024 IN SPL.C.NO.1489/2024 AND ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.NO.1489/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF
LEARNED LXX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
SPL.JUDGE AT BENGALURU (ANNEXURE-D) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
3(2)(5a) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT AND ALSO UNDER
SEC.506,34,504,323,324 OF IPC (COGNIZANCE TAKEN FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 3(1)(r)(s) 3(2)(va) OF ATROCITIES ACT IN
SPL.C.NO.1489/2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY
ORAL ORDER
1. Accused Nos.2 to 5 are before this Court in this criminal
petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to
quash the entire proceedings in Spl.C.No.1489/2024 pending
before the Court of LXX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
Special Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.202/2024
registered by Jayanagar Police Station, Bengaluru, for the
offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 and 34
of IPC and Section 3(2)(va) and 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Amendment Ordinance, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
SC/ST (POA) Act' for short).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Facts leading to filing of this criminal petition as revealed
from the records are FIR in Crime No.202/2024 was registered
by Jayanagar Police Station, Bengaluru, against Nagaraj Shetty
and the petitioners herein, based on the first information dated
08.06.2024 received from respondent No.2 herein. Police after
investigation have filed charge sheet against the petitioners for
the aforesaid offences. Accused No.1 named in the FIR has
been dropped in the charge sheet. Accused No.2 is the mother
of accused Nos.3 and 4. Accused No.5 is the friend of accused
No.3. Accused Nos.2 to 4 along with accused No.1 named in
the FIR are the tenants in the property belonging to CW-3 -
Vishwas Gauthan and respondent No.2 (CW1), who is the
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
victim in the present case is the employee of CW-3 and he
allegedly was taking care of the property. The allegation
against the accused in the charge sheet is that they were
quarreling with CW-1 herein frequently on petty issues and on
08.06.2024 when accused No.3 came down from his apartment
with his dog, a quarrel had taken place between CW1 and
accused No.3. Thereafter, accused Nos.2 and 4 also came to
the spot along with accused No.5 and had quarreled with CW1.
Accused Nos.3 to 5 allegedly had assaulted CW-1 with plastic
chair and table and when CW3 tried to interfere, accused No.3
allegedly abused CW1 referring to his caste.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that none of
the charge sheet witnesses have stated that accused persons
have abused CW1, who belongs to Scheduled Caste, referring
to his caste. He submits that even the offence punishable under
Section 324 of IPC does not get attracted in the present case
and the victim (CW1) has suffered only simple injuries in the
incident. No weapon was used by the accused to assault CW1.
Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
5. Per contra, learned HCGP for respondent No.1/State and
learned counsel for respondent No.2, who has filed his
statement of objections have opposed the prayer made in the
petition. They submit that charge sheet material makes out a
prima facie case as against the petitioner for the alleged
offences. This Court cannot hold a mini trial at this stage.
Victim has suffered injuries in the incident and allegation
against the accused is that they have assaulted him with chair
and table. CW1 undisputedly belongs to scheduled caste and
therefore, the act committed by the accused will attract the
charge-sheeted offences. Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the
petition.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 in support of his
arguments has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation
vs. Arvind Khanna in Criminal Appeal No.1572/2019 (arising
out of SLP (Crl.) No.1420/2017.
7. In the first information, which is submitted by the victim
(CW1), he has stated that he is working in the apartment
complex belonging to CW-3 for the past 16 years. The accused
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
named in the FIR was introduced by him as tenants to CW-3.
Initially, the accused used to talk to him and they also used to
give him food. Subsequently, after coming to know that he
belongs to scheduled caste, they started abusing him and they
also did not allow him to enter their house. However, in the
first information he has not given the particulars of any such
incident which had taken place earlier where the accused
persons have abused him or assaulted him after referring to his
caste. In respect of alleged incident that had taken place on
08.06.2024, he has stated that accused Nos.1 to 5 named in
the FIR had abused him referring to his caste and also
assaulted him with chair causing him injuries. During the
course of investigation, police have recorded statement of CW2,
3, 4, 6 and 7, who are the alleged eye witnesses to the incident
that had taken place on 08.06.2024.
8. Perusal of the statement of the aforesaid eyewitnesses
would go to show that none of the eyewitnesses have stated
that accused persons had abused CW1 on the alleged date of
the incident referring to his caste. All the eye witnesses have
only spoken about the quarrel between the accused and CW1.
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
Even CW-3 has not made any such allegation in his statement
about the accused persons abusing the victim referring to his
caste. Except CW1, no other charge sheet witness has stated
that accused persons had abused CW1 on the alleged date of
incident referring to his caste. Charge sheet has been filed in
the present case against the petitioners invoking Section
3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. However, the Trial Court has
taken cognizance against the accused for the offences
punishable under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST
(POA) Act.
9. Section 3(1)(r)(s) and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST
(POA) Act, reads as follows:-
"3. Punishments for offences atrocities.--
[(1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled
Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,--
xxx
(r) intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to
humiliate a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view;
(s) abuses any member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe by caste name in any place within
public view;"
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
xxx
"(2) Whoever, not being a member of a
Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,--
[(va) commits any offence specified in the
Schedule, against a person or property, knowing that
such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such
member, shall be punishable with such punishment as
specified under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) for
such offences and shall also be liable to fine;]"
10. For the purpose of attracting the offence punishable
under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, accused
should have abused or insulted the member of a Scheduled
Caste or Scheduled Tribe by referring to his caste in any place
within public view. As stated earlier, there is absolutely no
material available on record which would attract Section
3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, against the accused. For the
purpose of attracting the offence punishable under Section
3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, accused persons should have
committed the offence specified in the Schedule given to the
Act against a person or property knowing that such person is a
member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or such
property belongs to him.
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
11. In the present case, the property which is in dispute does
not belong to CW1. There is no such allegation either in the
first information or in the charge sheet that accused persons
had quarreled with the victim and assaulted him for the reason
that he is a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Verma
vs. The State of Uttarkhand and Another - (2020) 10 SCC
710, in paragraph Nos.17 and 18 has held as under:-
"17. In another judgment reported as Khuman
Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh, this Court held that
in a case for applicability of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act,
the fact that the deceased belonged to Scheduled Caste
would not be enough to inflict enhanced punishment.
This Court held that there was nothing to suggest that
the offence was committed by the appellant only
because the deceased belonged to Scheduled Caste.
The Court held as under:
"15. As held by the Supreme Court, the
offence must be such so as to attract the offence
under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act. The offence
must have been committed against the person on
the ground that such person is a member of
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe. In the
present case, the fact that the deceased was
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
belonging to "Khangar-Scheduled Caste is not
disputed. There is no evidence to show that the
offence was committed only on the ground that
the victim was a member of the Scheduled Caste
and therefore, the conviction of the appellant-
accused under Section 3(2) (v) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act is not sustainable."
18. Therefore, offence under the Act is not established
merely on the fact that the informant is a member of
Scheduled Caste unless there is an intention to humiliate
a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe for the
reason that the victim belongs to such caste. In the
present case, the parties are litigating over possession
of the land. The allegation of hurling of abuses is against
a person who claims title over the property. If such
person happens to be a Scheduled Caste, the offence
under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act is not made out."
13. The judgment on which reliance has been placed by
learned counsel for respondent No.2 cannot be made applicable
to the facts and circumstances of the case more so having
regard to the charge sheet material available on record in the
present case. It is relevant to note here that there is tenancy
dispute between CW-3 and accused nos.1 to 4. CW-1 is the
employee of CW-3. Under the circumstances, I am of the
opinion that the charge sheet material are not sufficient to
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
prosecute the petitioners for the offence punishable under
Section 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(2)(v)(a) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
14. Insofar as the offences punishable under Sections 323,
324, 504 and 506 of IPC are concerned, the material on record
would go to show that the accused persons after quarreling
with the victim (CW1) had also assaulted him and as a result,
he has suffered simple injuries. His Wound Certificate is
available along with the charge sheet and the statement of the
Doctor, who had treated him was also recorded by the
Investigation Officer. The allegation in the first information as
well as in the charge sheet is that accused persons had used
chair and table for assaulting victim (CW1), who has suffered
simple injuries as a result of the assault made by them. It is
also alleged that the accused persons have criminally
intimidated the victim after assaulting him. Under the
circumstances, I am of the opinion that there is prima facie
material to proceed against the accused persons for the alleged
offences under the Indian Penal Code. Under the
circumstances, the following:-
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:10906
HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) The criminal petition is partly allowed.
(ii) The entire proceedings in
Spl.C.No.1489/2024 pending before the Court of
LXX Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special
Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime
No.202/2024 registered by Jayanagar Police
Station, Bengaluru, insofar as it relates to the
offences punishable under Section 3(2)(v)(a) and
3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment
Ordinance, 2014, is quashed.
(iii) However, it is made clear that the
proceedings insofar as it relates to the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 read
with 34 of IPC shall continue against the
petitioners.
Sd/-
(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
DN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56
