[Cites 10, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri. Mohammed Haris Nalapad vs State By Sgwf on 9 February, 2026

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                                             -1-
                                                          NC: 2026:KHC:7606
                                                         WP No. 32 of 2026


                   HC-KAR




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                          BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
                          WRIT PETITION NO. 32 OF 2026 (GM-RES)
                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI MOHAMMED HARIS NALAPAD,
                   AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
                   S/O N.A.HARIS,
                   R/AT: NO.23, NALAPAD HOUSE,
                   1ST CROSS, MAGRATH ROAD,
                   NEAR GARUDA MALL,
                   ASHOK NAGAR, MUSEUM ROAD,
                   BENGALURU - 560 025.
                                                             ...PETITIONER
                   (BY MISS. SPARSHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:
Digitally signed
by SANJEEVINI
J KARISHETTY       STATE BY SGWF POST P.S. (RPF)
Location: High     REPRESENTED BY SPP,
Court of
Karnataka          HIGH COURT UNIT,
                   BENGALURU - 560 001.
                                                            ...RESPONDENT
                   (BY SRI. B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADD.SPP)

                        THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
                   AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH
                   SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
                   ENTIRE      PROCEEDINGS         IN   C.C.NO.32925/2022
                                 -2-
                                                  NC: 2026:KHC:7606
                                              WP No. 32 of 2026


HC-KAR




(ANNEXURE-A) PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF XLI
ADDL.     CHIEF    METROPOLITAN          MAGISTRATE          COURT,
BENGALURU, FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
U/S 145(C), 147, 154 AND 174(a) OF THE RAILWAYS ACT,
1989, ARISING OUT OF THE CHARGE SHEET FILED BY THE
RESPONDENT        NO.1        SGWF    POST   POLICE       STATION
RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE IN CRIME NO. 776/2022 SO
FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.

     THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS

DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA


                          ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the

proceedings in C.C.No.32925/2022 registered for the offences

punishable under Sections 145(c), 147, 154 and 174(a) of the

Railways Act, 1989.

2. Heard Miss. Sparsha Shetty, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner, Sri.B.N.Jagadeesha, learned Addl.

SPP appearing for the respondent and have perused the

material on record.

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

At 1:30 p.m., on 27.07.2022, the accused members of

the Congress party were present at platform No.3 at Whitefield

railway station, raising slogans against the Central Government

on certain policy issues. The petitioner and others are said to

be indulging in a peaceful demonstration. The demonstrators

therein squat in front of train No.01773 which was Bangarpet-

KSR, Bengaluru, resulting in detention of the train for

approximately 39 minutes. The station master of the Whitefield

Railway Station informs the Railway Protection Force to register

a complaint, which becomes a crime in Cr.No.776/2022 for the

afore-quoted offences. Investigation is conducted and the

Railway Protection Force file a charge sheet against the

petitioner and others, and on 19.11.2022, the concerned Court

takes cognizance of the afore-quoted offences. Taking of

cognizance and issuance of a non-bailable warrant against the

petitioner has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject

petition.

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

4. Learned counsel Miss. Sparsha Shetty appearing for

the petitioner would vehemently contend that the invocation of

Section 154 of the Railways Act is solely misconceived as the

complaint nor the chargesheet alleges any act resulting in

endangering the safety of the passengers or damage to railway

tracks. All that the petitioner is alleged to have done along with

others is squatting on the railway track which delayed the train

by 39 minutes. In the absence of any allegation of endangering

any passengers safety or damage to the railway equipment, the

cognizance being taken is without application of mind and

contrary to law. She seeks to rely upon the judgment rendered

by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of

DIWAKAR DEV SHARMA AND OTHERS v. GOVERNMENT

RAILWAY POLICE STATION AND ANOTHER1.

5. Per contra, learned Addl. SPP Sri. B.N.Jagadeesh

appearing for the respondent would vehemently refute the

submission in contending that the petitioner in fact did squat

over the railway track. Therefore, it is for them to come out

clean in a full blown trial.

Cr.MMO No.902 of 2022, disposed on 26.04.2023

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the

submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have

perused the material on record.

7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. Since

the entire issue has now triggered from the complaint, which in

fact triggered from a spot mahazar, reads as follows:

"8 Brief fact of the case: -

On 27.07.2022 at about 13.34hrs Station Master/Whitefield Railway station informed that an about 20 congress members under the leadership of Shri Mohammed Haris Nalpad S/O Harris Nalpad, state President Karnataka Pradesh youth congress committee arrived on PF No- 3 of Whitefield Railway station and squatted in front of Tr. No. 01773 Ex:

Bangarpet- KSR Bengaluru by sloganeering against Central Government about its bias against the congress leaders and the policies of the central government and further climbed on the engine of the said train and obstructed the movement of the train.

On receipt of information, SIPF/RPF/Devangonthi(DKN), ASI/RPF/Satellite Goods Terminal (SGWF) and staffs along with local police and GRP/Bangaluru Cantonment staffs attended the spot and removed the agitators from the track and cleared the track for the movement of the train and the said train left the Whitefield station at 14.12hrs. Due to this the said train suffered detention for 39minutes. In this regard, ASI/RPF/Satellite Goods Terminal prepared a Joint Observation Mahazar duly taken photographs and video of the agitators and agitation. On the basis of the complaint received from Station Master/Whitefield, Shri K S Suresh ASIPF/SGWF registered a case in Satellite Goods Terminal-Out Post

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

vide Cr No-776/2022, u/s 147, 145(C), 154 & 174(a) of Railway Act and took up further enquiry."

8. The railway protection force conducts investigation.

Investigation leads to the filing of the charge sheet before the

concerned Court. The concerned Court takes cognizance of the

aforesaid offences. The order of taking of cognizance reads as

follows:

"The Sub-Inspector, RPF of SGWF Post PS, South western Railways, Bengaluru, has filed charge sheet. I have perused the Charge Sheet. There are prima facie materials to proceed against the accused for the offences P/U/S 145(c) 147, 154 and 174(a) Railways Act-1989 Amended 2003.

Hence, cognizance is taken U/s 190 of Cr.P.C for the offences P/U/S 145(c) 147, 154 and 174(a) of Railways Act-1989 Amended 2003 against accused No.1 to 5. Office is directed to register this case as Crl.Case.

Accused No.1 to 5 are not arrested.

Issue summons to accused No.1 to 5.

Returnable by 22.12.2022."

9. The order of taking of cognizance for the offences

as aforesaid does not inspire even a semblance of confidence

apart from the fact that none of the ingredients of Section 154

nor Section 174(a) of the Railways Act are met in the case at

hand. In identical circumstances of identical offences, the High

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

Court of Himachal Pradesh in the case of DIWAKAR DEV

SHARMA (supra) has held as follows:

".... .... ....

29. Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General invited attention of this Court to S.174 of the Indian Railways Act, 1989, which is reproduced herein below:

"174. Obstructing running of train, etc.--If any railway servant (whether on duty or otherwise) or any other person obstructs or causes to be obstructed or attempts to obstruct any train or other rolling stock upon a railway,--

(a) by squatting or picketing or during any Rail roko agitation or bandh; or

(b) by keeping without authority any rolling stock on the railway; or

(c) by tampering with, disconnecting or interfering in any other manner with its hose pipe or tampering with signal gear or otherwise, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or with both."

30. No doubt, as per aforesaid provision of law, a person shall be punished with imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years on account of his having obstructed railway track, but if the averments contained in the FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceeding, are perused in their entirety, there is no specific allegation that the persons named in the FIR obstructed passage of train rather, they came on the spot to lodge protest against death of a local person but thereafter, they disbursed after being assured by the authorities of Railways and the State i.e. Sub Divisional Magistrate that necessary provision of overhead bridge shall be made.

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

31. Leaving everything aside, this court having taken note of the material placed on record alongwith final report filed under S.173 CrPC, has no hesitation to conclude that the alleged incident of obstructing railway track happened on account of emotional outburst on account of death of a local person and none of the agitators including the petitioners had any kind of intention to obstruct the railway track or cause damage to public property but since their repeated requests were not paid any heed by the railway administration or district administration, after death of one person, petitioners gathered to agitate against railway administration."

(Emphasis supplied)

In the light of the ingredients of the offence being

completely absent and the order of cognizance bearing no

application of mind, as also the issue being considered by High

Court of Himachal Pradesh, to which I am in respectful

agreement of, the petition deserves to succeed.

10. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

[I] Writ Petition is allowed.

[II] Proceedings in C.C.No.32925/2022 pending

before the Court of XLI Addl. Chief Metropolitan

NC: 2026:KHC:7606

HC-KAR

Magistrate Court, Bengaluru, qua the petitioner,

stands quashed.