Reserved on : 28.11.2025 Pronounced on : 08.01.2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 08^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10047 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

BINOD KUMAR BIMAL S/O KAMALESHWARI PRASAD AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NO.C-05 PANCHDEEP NIKUNJ NEAR BIMA HOSPITAL NANDA NAGAR MADHYA PRADESH – 452 011.

... PETITIONER (BY SRI M.R.C.MANOHAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY RAJAJINAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU – 560 001.

2 . SMT. MENAKA W/O LATE SAMPANGI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT NO.73, ANANDAPURA CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU – 560 018.

... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;

SRI S.DORERAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., (528 OF BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.C.NO.876/2025 (CR.NO.16/2022) REGISTERED BY THE RAJAJINAGAR P.S., BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 354, 504, 506, 509 R/W SEC. 149 OF IPC AND SEC.3, 3(1)(e), 3(1)(h) AND 3(1)(r) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT, BEFORE THE HON’BLE LXX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL. JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-71).

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 28.11.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

CAV ORDER

The petitioner/accused No.1 is before this Court calling in question entire proceedings in Special C.C.No.876 of 2025 arising out of Crime No.16 of 2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 354, 504, 506, 509, 149 of the IPC and Sections 3, 3(1)(e), 3(1)(h), 3(1)(r) of the Schedule Caste and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘the Act’ for short).

2. Heard Sri M.R.C. Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner; Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri S. Doreraju, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

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

The 2^nd respondent is the complainant. A complaint comes to be registered on 11-02-2022 alleging that the petitioner who was in a dominant position sexually harassed the 2^nd respondent who was an Attender under the petitioner and was being asked to do all services to the petitioner. The complaint becomes a crime in Crime No.16 of 2022 for several offences as afore-quoted. The Police conduct investigation and file a ‘B’ report before the concerned Court. It appears that the complainant was not heard while accepting and closing the case on acceptance of ‘B’ report. The 2^nd respondent then had to approach this Court in Crl.P.No.3985 of 2023 and the matter was remitted back to the concerned Court to pass necessary orders in accordance with law. The concerned Court then secures a report of what had happened to pass an order on the ‘B’ report that had already been filed. It is then the Court rejects the ‘B’ report, takes cognizance of the offence against the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner is before this Court in the subject petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri M.R.C. Manohar would vehemently contend that the police after investigation have filed not one, but two ‘B’ reports. Notwithstanding the same, the concerned Court has taken cognizance of the offence. The offences alleged are all frivolous, ingredients of which are completely absent in the case at hand. Under the petitioner, close to 2500 people were employed. It could not be said that the petitioner would eye on only one or two. Getting a massage from the Attender was false. It is the security services through which the complainant had been out- sourced who has hatched a conspiracy to defame the petitioner, as the petitioner did not yield to their demands. He would therefore, seek quashment of proceedings.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel Sri S.Doreraju appearing for the 2^nd respondent/complainant would take this Court through