IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13872 OF 2024 BETWEEN:

SRI BASANAGOUDA R. PATIL (YATNAL), S/O RAMANAGOUDA B.PATIL YATNAL, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, OCC: MLA, VIJAYAPURA CONSTITUENCY R/AT OLD IB, STATION ROAD, VIJAYAPURA - 586 101, KARNATAKA, ALSO AT SINDAGI ROAD MAHAL AINAPUR, BIJAPUR, KARNATAKA - 586 104.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI VENKATESH P DALWAI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

SRI SHIVANANDA S. PATIL, S/O SIDRAMAPPA PATIL, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: MLA R/AT NERA JAMKHANDI CROSS, OPPOSITE TO PETROL PUMP, Digitally signed by JAMKHANDI ROAD, GAVRIBIDA NUR VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.

SUBRAMANYA GUPTA …RESPONDENT SREENATH (BY SRI RAVI B. NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR Location: HIGH COURT OF SMT.VIJETHA R. NAIK, ADVOCATE)

KARNATAKA THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC (UNDER SECTION 528 BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2024 PASSED BY XLII ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU CITY IN PCR NO.9136/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 356(2) OF BNS, 2023 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner, who is arrayed as an accused in PCR No.9136/24 filed by the respondent - complainant for the offence punishable under section

356(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent -

complainant, who is a Member of Legislative Assembly lodged a complaint with the jurisdictional Magistrate against the petitioner for having made defamatory speech at an election rally. The petitioner questioned the issuance of summons to him on the ground that the procedure as contemplated under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS, 2023 for short) was not strictly followed.

3. I have heard learned counsel - Sri Venkatesh P Dalwai for the petitioner as well as learned Senior Counsel - Sri Ravi B. Naik representing learned counsel - Smt.

Vijetha R. Naik for the respondent.

4. It is contention of Sri Venkatesh P. Dalwai, learned counsel for the petitioner that this Court while allowing the earlier petition filed by the present petitioner in Crl.P No.7526/2024, quashed the order dated 16^th July 2024 passed by the learned Magistrate in PCR No.9136/2024 and remitted matter the back to the learned Magistrate to redo the exercise afresh, from the stage of entertainment of the complaint, bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order, by fixing the time limit.

5. It is further contention of learned counsel that despite a specific order passed by this Court to comply with the provisions of Section 223 of BNSS, 2023, copies of the complaint, sworn statement and other relevant materials were not served on the petitioner. It is also contended that on perusal of Annexure-D, it is seen that the notice issued to the petitioner on the complaint filed by himself and thus, there is a flaw and error committed in the notice as the complainant and the accused shown in the notice are one and the same and the said notice is signed by the learned Presiding Officer. Therefore, he contends that the provisions of Section 223, BNSS though ordered to be strictly followed, has not been complied diligently and on the contrary, notice is issued which depicts that the complaint is filed by the petitioner and the same is issued to the petitioner himself as an accused in the said case, which itself clearly depicts that there is absolute non-application of mind. Hence, the order impugned is illegal and requires to be quashed.

6. Per contra, learned senior counsel - Sri Ravi B Naik on behalf of Smt. Vijetha R. Naik representing the respondent contends that private complaint has been filed by the respondent/complainant - Sri Shivananda S. Patil in PCR No.9136/2024 as per Annexure-B and the lear