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) 1111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
J.M.KHAZI, J.
 
Sri. M. Goutham Chand S/o Late Motilal - Appellant 
Versus 
State Of Karnataka - Respondent 
Criminal Petition No. 10718 of 2022 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
Decided on : 09-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI. RAMESH K.R., ADVOCATE
For the Respondent: SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP

Specific allegations of assault and threats warrant a full trial, even in cases involving prior civil disputes and claims of forged documents.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Petitioners, accused of offences under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC, claimed prior transactions involving forged documents. Court found prima facie evidence supporting allegations and noted that previous similar cases were not applicable due to specific facts. (Paras 1, 8, 12)

(B) Criminal Liability - When specific allegations exist, involving threats and assaults, the prosecution should be allowed to establish facts through trial. Dismissed the petition to quash proceedings against accused. (Paras 12)

Facts of the case:
Accused Nos.1 and 2, husband and wife, faced charges stemming from a complex land transaction, where they claimed to be in lawful possession while contesting allegations of forgery by others including a power of attorney holder. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
The Court established that specific allegations against the accused required a full trial rather than quashal of proceedings, given prima facie evidence of criminal conduct. (Paras 12)

Issues: Whether the petitioners could quash criminal proceedings despite claims of a civil dispute and previous quash orders from similar cases. (Paras 10, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that mere existence of civil disputes does not preclude criminal liability when there are direct allegations of assault and threats, necessitating a trial for factual determination. (Paras 12)

Result: Petition rejected.

Table of Content
1. background of the case with factual details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding the legitimacy of proceedings. (Para 4 , 8)
3. court's observations on evidence and civil versus criminal nature. (Para 6)
4. conclusion on the necessity of a full trial. (Para 12)
5. final order rejecting the petition. (Para 13)

ORDER :

Petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 2, have filed this petition under the Section 482 Cr.P.C, to pass the criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.2735/2021 (arising out of Cr.No.96/2021 of Tavarekere PS), for the offences punishable under Sections 420 , 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC.

2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

3. In support of the petition, petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 have contented that they are husband and wife. Accused No.1 purchased land in Sy.No.28 of Varthuru, Narasipura village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bangalore South, measuring 5 acres 14 guntas + 3 guntas of kharab through registered sale deed dated 31.03.2016 from M/s DLF housing Company and 3 others represented by their general power of attorney holder accused No.4 V.Ravi Kumar. Accused No.1 has gifted the said property in favour of accused No.2 through registered gift deed dated 30.03.2017. Since from the date of purchase accused Nos.1 and 2 are in possession and enjoyment of the schedule property.

3.1 However, accused No.4 V.Ravi Kumar created an unregistered GPA dated 16.02.2017 in the name of accused No.1 in collusion with advocate & Notary Aravind Patil G.G and Siddarudh M.J in respect of 20 guntas of land out of 5 acres 14 guntas. Making use of the fraudulent GPA, accused No.4 V.Ravi Kumar has executed a registered agreement of sale dated 28.03.2017 in collusion with accused No.5. Based on the said agreement of sale, accused Nos.4 and 5 in collusion with respondent No.2 have executed registered dated 01.06.2017 in respect of site No.93 said to have been formed in 20 guntas of land.

3.2 Accused Nos.1 and 2 have not at all formed any layout in any extent of 5 acres 14 guntas. Accused Nos.1 and 2 came to know about these transactions only when some third parties along with respondent No.2 came near the scheduled property and started interfering. In respect of the same, accused No.1 filed PCR.No.37/2020 against respondent No.2 V.Ravi Kumar, Aravind Patil G.G and Siddarudha. On reference to police for investigation, it was registered in Cr.No.337/2020 of Tavarekere PS. However, without conducting proper investigation, the concerned police have filed 'B' report. Respondent No.2 filed a false complaint in PCR.No.191/2020 against accused Nos.1 to 5, including the petitioners alleging interference. On reference, it was registered in Cr.No.96/2021. Without conducting proper investigation, the concerned police have filed charge sheet in C.C.No.2735/2021. Aggrieved by the same, accused Nos.1 and 2 have filed this petition on the following:

GROUNDS

(i) The filing of the charge sheet is highly illegal, arbitrary and opposed to the principles of natural justice and as such liable to be quashed. Accused Nos.4 and 5 in collusion with respondent No.2 have create forged documents. The signatures found in the unregistered GPA is forged and consequently, accused Nos.1 and 2 are not responsible for the subsequent documents. Accused Nos.4 and 5 in collusion with the advocate Aravind Patil G.G have allegedly formed 48 sites in 20 guntas which is highly improbable. By collecting huge money, they have cheated many people. The concerned police have not even bothered to compare the signatures in the GPA with that of accused No.1 and filed 'B' report, even though he has furnished all the documents. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence the petition.

4. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel representing accused Nos.1 and 2 submitted that simil

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