IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.12200 OF 2025 BETWEEN:

1. SURESH, S/O SHIVA RAMA RAO S, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT NO.1036/14E, SUMUKH BHOOMI S.J.H, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, VIDYARANYAPURAM, MYSURU CITY, MYSURU-570008.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. DHANUSH MENON, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. AKSHAY RAMACHANDRA HUDDAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA Digitally signed by DEVIKA M BY ASHOKPURAM POLICE STATION, MYSURU, REPRESENTED BY SPP OFFICE, Location: HIGH COURT OF HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KARNATAKA BENGALURU-560001.

2. MAHESH R.C., S/O RAMACHANDRAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO.2084, 4^TH CROSS, ASHOKAPURAM, MYSURU CITY, MYSURU-570008.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.432/2023, REGISTERED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT-POLICE ASHOKPURAM POLICE STATION PURSUANT TO THE FILING OF THE CHARGESHEET DATED 10.05.2022 (ANNEXURE-C) IN CC NO.432/2023 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 120B, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 R/W SECTION 34 OF THE IPC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1-State. This petition is filed praying this Court to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.432/2023 registered by the 1^st respondent - Ashokpuram Police Station pursuant to the filing of the charge sheet dated 10.05.2022, (Annexure-C) in C.C.No.432/2023 for the offences punishable under Section 120B, 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code pending on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM Court, Mysuru.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner in his argument would vehemently contend that there are no material against the present petitioner and only allegation is made in the private complaint at page No.6 of the complaint that this petitioner with an intention to cheat, prepared fake forged documents by impersonating Smt.M.V.Shamala and Smt.R.Indiramma and availed loan of Rs.65,00,000/- from M/s Navanagara Urban Co- operative Bank, Hottagally Branch, Mysore by mortgaging the fake title deeds and forged documents of properties prepared in the name of both of them and coming to know the about the above fraud, they again obtained the encumbrance certificate from the Sub-Registrar of South Mysore and the above loan of Rs.65,00,000/- was encumbered in the name of Smt.R.Indiramma and Smt.M.V.Shamala along with their property situated in Sy.No.102/1A which was converted into Sy.No.1864/c New No.CH 44/3, measuring 1,25,509 square feet.

3. The counsel also would submits that only allegation is made in page No.6 against this petitioner and while filing the charge sheet as per Annexure-C, no material is collected against this petitioner that he had indulged in committing the fraud or conspiracy and Trial Court ought not to have taken the cognizance and proceeded against this petitioner. The counsel also would submits that cognizance is taken for both the offences under Section 406 and 420 of IPC as well as other offences and ought not to have been done. If it is allegation of cheating would have invoked Section 420 and not 406 of IPC.

4. The counsel in support of his argument, relies upon the judgment of Apex Court (2024) 10 Supreme Court Cases 690 in case of Delhi Race Club (1940) 940 Ltd., and others V/s State of Uttar Pradesh and another and brought to notice of this Court paragraph No.43 wherein distinction is made with regard to the offence under Section 420 as well as 406 of IPC.

5. The counsel also relies upon the judgment of Apex Court reported in (2025) SCC Online SC 2058 in case of Arshad Neyaz Khan V/s State of Jharkhand and another and brought to notice of this Court paragraph No.16 whe