SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 515

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU 
S.R.Krishna Kumar, J.
Mr. Lakshminarayana @ Lachhi, S/o Late Chandran - Petitioner
Versus
State of Karnataka By Malur Police Station, Represented By The SPP and ors. - Respondents
Criminal Petition No. 5950 of 2025 (482(Cr.PC) of 528 (BNSS)
Decided On : 12-06-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Poojith Prasad D., Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri. Sowmya R., HCGP

The court found that without the necessary government notifications under the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act, the charges against the petitioner were invalid, constituting an abuse of legal process.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 143, 147, 149, 188, 268, 269, 283, and 353 - Quashing of charge sheet - Petitioner was not arraigned as accused in the FIR/complaint until after the charge sheet was filed, lacking incriminating evidence against him - The absence of a notification under Section 4 of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act fundamentally flaws the case against the petitioner for violations under the Act - A trivial act alleged does not establish the alleged offences, indicating an abuse of the legal process. (Paras 3-10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenges his arraignment as Accused No.36 in pending criminal proceedings without any substantive evidence and seeks to quash the charge sheet and related FIRs filed due to a rally incident.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled that without necessary regulations or notifications in place, the offences alleged against the petitioner cannot stand.

Issues: Whether the charge sheet based on weak allegations should be quashed and if sufficient material existed to sustain the charges against the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the lack of proper notifications under the Epidemic Diseases Act prevented any legitimate claim of offences against the petitioner, demonstrating an unwarranted application of legal processes.

Result: Petition allowed; proceedings quashed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks to quash charge sheet due to absence of evidence. (Para 2)
2. petitioner argues lack of incriminating evidence. (Para 3 , 4)
3. discussion on procedural flaws in allegations. (Para 5)
4. arguments presented regarding the flaws in the charge sheet. (Para 6)
5. court emphasizes necessity of notifications for criminal liability. (Para 7 , 8)

ORDER :

S.R.Krishna Kumar, J.

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

“A. QUASH the impugned charge sheet filed by the Respondent No.1 Police against the Petitioner/Accused No.36 for offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 149, 188, 268, 269 , 283 and 353 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (Annexure-E) pending before the Hon’ble II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kolar District at Malur;

B. QUASH the Complaint dated 14.07.2020 (Annexure-A), the FIR dated 14.07.2020 registered in Crime No.155 of 2020 by the Respondent No.1 Police (Annexure-B) and Supplementary Complaint dated 16.07.2020 (Annexure-C) as against the Petitioner herein for offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 188, 269, 149,283, 268 and 353 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1960.

C. Quash the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.2274 of 2024 registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.36 for offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 149, 188, 268, 269 , 283 and 353 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 pending on the file of the Hon’ble II Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Kolar District at Malur.

D. Grant such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.

3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a perusal of the material on record comprising of the complaint, FIR etc., will indicate that the petitioner was not arraigned as accused. However, the petitioner has been arraigned as accused in the charge sheet, which is currently pending in C.C.No.2294/2024 before the Trial Court, for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 147, 188, 268, 269 , 283 and 353 of IPC . It is submitted that in the absence of any material on record to incriminate the petitioner for the alleged offences, the impugned proceedings deserves to be quashed in the light of the provisions enunciated by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of D.K. Shivakumar Vs. State of Karnataka and another – Crl.P.No.3328/2023 dated 16.06.2023 and Mr. Sharanu Salagar Vs. State of Karnataka and another – Crl.P.No.6495/2023 dated 24.08.2023 at Annexures-G and H, respectively, insofar as the petitioner in this petition is concerned.

4. Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is an undisputed fact borne out from the material on record that the petitioner is not arraigned as accused in the complaint and FIR and subsequently, he has been arraigned as accused No.36 in the impugned charge sheet, without there being any material on record against the petitioner in this regard. It is also relevant to state that in the case of D.K. Shiva Kumar (supra) (Annexure-G), a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has held as under:

“The petitioner is before this Court calling in question registration of crime in Crime No.3 of 2022 for offences punishable under Section 5 (3A) of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act, 2020 r/w. Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short), as also the charge sheet filed by the Police on 03-02-2022 in C.C.No.1663 of 2022 before the I Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) & JMFC, Kanakapura for the aforesaid offences.

2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows:-

The petitioner is the Presiden

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top