IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
J.M. KHAZI, J.
Chandramouleshwara Shivacharya Swamigalu - Appellant
Versus
Ramachandra Swamy S/o Natarajan - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 4326 of 2023
Decided On : 08-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural background and allegations (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claims and counterclaims in legal proceedings (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. evidence and investigations supporting allegations (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. identification issues of the accused in procedural context (Para 16 , 17) |
| 5. final order of rejection of the petition (Para 18) |
ORDER :
1. In this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, petitioners who are arraigned as accused Nos.1 and 2 are seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.1873/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 416 , 417, 418, 449, 420, 465, 466, 468, 471, 120-B r/w Section 34 IPC (arising out of Cr.No.150/2018 of respondent No.2 Upparpete PS).
2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.
3. In support of the petition, accused Nos.1 and 2 have contended that defacto complainant has filed PCR.No.7869/2018 before the V ACMM Court, Bengaluru, alleging that accused No.1 has impersonated as Chandramouleshwara Shivacharaya Swamiji of Ramalingeshwar Math ('original pontiff' for short) and accused No.2 is helping him in impersonating as the original pontiff and to claim the property of the Ramalingeshwar Math. The correct name of respondent No.1 who has filed the complaint is Ramachandran Sami, hailing from Tamil Nadu. He was a Maison by profession under one R.S.Gowda, a civil contractor. In O.S.No.4386/2015, filed by him against the Railways, his correct name is given. The said suit came to be dismissed for default on 15.02.2021.
3.1 Sri.Ramalingeshwar Math was established during 15th Century pursuant to the institution of an endowment by the King of Keladi. Accused No.1 Sri.Chandramouleshwarachar Swamiji is the present pontiff of the Math. Even though there was some issues regarding Mathadipathi of the said Math, they were resolved and accused No.1 was appointed as pontiff of the said Math.
3.2 Vide order dated 22.12.2004, the Government has appointed accused No.1 as Mathadipathi. Property bearing Sy.No.18 of Hanumanthapura village, now called as Gandhinagar (majestic) BBMP No.13/2, 6th Cross, Gandhinagar measuring 150 x 44 yards was gifted by Mathadipathi of Thippashetty Math to Ramalingeshwar Math for construction of buffalo shed of the Math therein. When BBMP attempted to interfere, accused No.1 filed suit for injunction and it was decreed. Since then he is in possession and enjoyment of the said property without interruption. When South Western Railways attempted to interfere, accused No.1 filed complaint and also O.S.No.2251/2018 against the railway authorities and secured injunction, after which there is no interference by the Railways.
3.3 When defacto complainant along with rowdy elements gave threat to accused No.1, he filed complaint before respondent No.2 Police. Since they did not take any action, he filed PCR.No.5641/2018. It was referred to the respondent No.1 Police and registered in Cr.No.122/2018. After completing the investigation, charge sheet is filed in C.C.No.29908/2018.
3.4 As a counter blast, respondent No.1/defacto complainant filed PCR.No.7869/2018. It was registered in Cr.No.150/2018. In respect of the same respondent No.3 Police have filed charge sheet in C.C.No.1873/2020 for the offences punishable under Section 416 , 417, 418, 449, 420, 465, 466, 468, 471, 120-B r/w Section 34 IPC. Aggrieved by the same, accused Nos.1 and 2 have filed this petition on the following:
GROUNDS
(i) The very entertaining, registration of the complaint and taking cognizance is illegal and unsustainable. In the complaint, respondent No.1/defacto complainant has stated that the Sarvadikari Shivayogeshwara Shivacharya Mahaswamy and its Managing Trustee Sri.Gangadhara Prasad C has jointly executed GPA dated 02.12.1998 in favour of one Pradeep Diwan and handed over possession of the schedule property by receiving valid consideration. However, in W.P.No.3596/1997 vide order
Impersonation in claims involving religious institutions warrants stringent legal scrutiny; sufficient evidence supports continuity of criminal proceedings against accused.
Insufficient evidence for impersonation and fraud led to quashing criminal proceedings under IPC.
The absence of an affidavit supporting a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. renders criminal proceedings unsustainable, irrespective of concurrent civil issues, as established in relevant case la....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.