[Cites 12, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Nagendra vs The State Of Karnataka on 26 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
CRL.P No. 201714 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 201714 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. NAGENDRA
S/O KRISHNAJI KHARATMOL
AGE: 60 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O VILLAGE BEMALKHEDA
TQ: CHITAGUPPA
DIST: BIDAR - 585227
2. BALAMMA
W/O NAGENDRA KHARATMOL
AGE: 55 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE
Digitally signed by R/O VILLAGE BEMALKHEDA
SHIVALEELA
DATTATRAYA UDAGI TQ: CHITGUPPA, DIST: BIDAR-585227
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...PETITIONERS
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. GHATE KONDIBARAO, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH ITS SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE
BEMALKHEDA POLICE STATION
TQ: CHITAGUPPA, DIST: BIDAR-585227
THROUGH ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
KALABURAGI, HIGH COURT BENCH
KALABURAGI.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
CRL.P No. 201714 of 2025
HC-KAR
2. CHANDRAMMA
W/O JHARANAPPA SINDABANDAGI
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O VILLAGE BEMALKHEDA
TQ: CHITAGUPPA
DIST: BIDAR-585227
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. (OLD), U/SEC.
528 OF BNSS (NEW), PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF
C.C.NO.606/025 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, HUMNABAD AND THEREBY PLEASED TO ALLOW THE
PETITION AND ORDER FOR QUASHING THE CRIMINAL
PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE ON
THE COMPLAINT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 FOR THE
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 324 AND 504
R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO.44/2021
BEMALKHEDA P.S. BIDAR WHICH IS SUBSEQUENTLY
NUMBERED AS C.C.NO.606/2025 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HUMNABAD.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
CRL.P No. 201714 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners have filed this petition under Section
528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for
short, 'BNSS, 2023') seeking following reliefs:
"Wherefore, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to call for the records of C.C.No.606/2025 on
the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad
and thereby pleased to allow the petition and order
for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated by
respondent No.1 police on the complaint filed by
respondent No.2 for the offences punishable under
sections 323, 324 and 504 r/w section 34 of IPC,
arising out of Crime No.44/2021 Bemalkheda p.s.
Bidar which is subsequently numbered as
C.C.No.606/2025 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Humnabad."
2. The brief facts of the case is that, respondent
No.2-complainant and her family members are accused in
C.C.No.260/2016 on the file of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC,
Humnabad. The said Court passed the order of conviction
for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 326 of IPC.
Aggrieved by the same, appeal was filed in
Crl.A.No.103/2018 before the II-Addl. Dist. & Sessions
Court, Bidar, Sitting at Basavakalyan. The same came to
be dismissed. Thereafter on 01.10.2021, respondent
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
HC-KAR
No.2/complainant gave a complaint against the
petitioners-accused and four others before the
respondent-police for the offences punishable under
Sections 504, 149, 323, 324 IPC and respondent No.1
registered a case in Crime No.44/2021. That on
10.01.2022 respondent No.1-Police have submitted 'B'
report in Crime No.44/2021 before the Senior Civil Judge
& JMFC, Humnabad. On 17.02.2022 the Magistrate on
receiving 'B' final report, issued notice to the complainant,
who appeared and filed protest petition and proceeded for
recording of her statement. That on 28.06.2023
respondent No.2-complainant was examined as PW.1 in
Crime No.44/2021, and on 16.09.2023 the husband of the
complainant, namely, Jharnappa was examined as PW.2.
That on 27.03.2024 the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC,
Humnabad proceeded in taking cognizance for the offence
under Sections 323, 324, 504 read with Section 34 of IPC,
as against the petitioners/accused and four others and
directed to register criminal case and summons were
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
HC-KAR
issued to the accused. Being aggrieved by the order of
cognizance dated 27.03.2024, the accused/petitioners
have filed this petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners would submit that the order of cognizance
passed in Crime No.44/2021 is without any independent
statement recorded by the witnesses mentioned in the
FIR. So, there is no any cogent and convincing reasons
assigned by the learned Magistrate. Accordingly the order
of cognizance is completely bad in the eye of law and
liable to be quashed. The Learned Magistrate has taken
cognizance under Sections 323, 324, 504 read with
Section 34 of IPC. However, the said order is completely
silent, as against which of the accused, the said
cognizance is taken. Accordingly, the said cognizance
order has resulted in abuse of process of law and non-
application of judicious mind and there are no reasons as
such assigned by the learned Magistrate. Accordingly, the
order of cognizance is liable to be quashed. The learned
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
HC-KAR
Magistrate has relied upon the discharge certificate- Ex.P6,
more importantly, the discharge certificate does not
contain nature of injury sustained by respondent No.2. On
the other hand, the wound certificate issued by the
Medical Officer, Manna-Ekheli Civil Hospital, refers that no
any injuries have been found on the body of respondent
No.2/complainant. Therefore, the petitioners/accused have
not committed any offence. The learned magistrate by
referring the medical bill cannot take cognizance of the
offence. So there is complete non-application of judicious
mind. After the investigation, the Investigating Officer has
submitted the 'B' final report for two times. The
complainant has filed a protest petition for the first 'B'
report. But the complainant has not filed a second protest
petition to the second 'B' report. Hence, cognizance taken
by the learned Magistrate is not sustainable under law. On
all these grounds, prays to allow the petition.
4. I examined the materials placed before this
Court.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
HC-KAR
5. On the basis of complaint filed by the
complainant-Chandramma, respondent-Bemakhed Police
have registered a case in Crime No.44/2021 and
submitted FIR to the Court. After investigation, the
Investigating Officer has submitted 'B' final report. The
complainant has filed the protest petition to the first 'B'
report. The learned Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Humnabad
has rejected 'B' report and ordered to conduct proper
investigation and submit report. After re-investigation,
that on 29.05.2024 the Investigating Officer has submitted
second 'B' report. After filing second 'B' report, the
complainant has not adduced any sworn statement and
witnesses are also not examined. Prior to rejecting first 'B'
report, PW.1-Chandramma examined and PW.2-Jharnappa
also examined. Even in the evidence of PW.1, she has not
whispered anything against accused. However, the Trial
Court has taken cognizance against all the accused for the
alleged commission of offences. When the second 'B'
report is filed, the complainant ought to have file protest
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
HC-KAR
petition and thereafter, the Trial Court ought to have
recorded the sworn statement of the complainant and
other witnesses. But in the case on hand, after filing the
second 'B' report, though the complainant has not filed
any protest petition and adduced sworn statement of the
complainant and other witnesses, the Trial Court has taken
cognizance against the accused, which is not in accordance
with law. Since there is some procedural irregularity, the
matter has to be remanded to the Trial Court with a
direction to follow the proper procedure.
6. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned order passed by the Senior
Civil Judge & JMFC, Humnabad dated
27.03.2024 is set aside.
(iii) The matter stands remitted to the Senior
Civil Judge & JMFC, Humnabad with a
direction to provide opportunity to the
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2753
HC-KAR
complainant to file protest petition to the
second 'B' report submitted by the
Investigating Officer.
(iv) After filing protest petition, the Trial Court
is directed to provide opportunity to the
complainant to record the sworn statement
of the complainant and their witnesses, if
any.
(v) After recording the sworn statement of the
complainant and witnesses, if any, the
Trial Court shall proceed with the case in
accordance with law.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order along
with TCR to the Trial Court.
Sd/-
(G BASAVARAJA)
JUDGE
SDU
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 25;CT-BH
