IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO.3037 OF 2024 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS)-)

BETWEEN:

MR. VASANTH V. FERNANDES SON OF LATE MR. SEBASTIAN FERNANDES, AGED 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.16, ALBERT STREET, RICHMOND TOWN, BANGALORE - 560 025 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES., PARTY-IN-PERSON)

AND:

MS. POOJA R DAUGHTER OF MR. RUDRAIAH Digitally AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, signed by RESIDING AT NO.16, NAGARAJA B M ALBERT STREET, RICHMOND TOWN , Location: BANGALORE - 560 025 HIGH COURT …RESPONDENT OF KARNATAKA (BY SRI. HARIPRASAD M B., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.07.2023 IN PCR.NO.55409/2017 AT ANNEXURE-C TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCES ALLEGEDLY COMMITTED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 341, 323, 354, 354(A), 504 AND 506 OF IPC, WHEREBY THE TRIAL COURT HAS NOW CONVERTED THE CASE INTO C.C.NO.55895/2023 ON THE FILE OF XXIX ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AT MAYO HALL, BENGALURU AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS DEEMED FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN FURTHERANCE OF JUSTICE.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

The captioned petition is filed assailing the order dated 10.07.2023 passed in PCR No.55409/2017, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354A, 504 and 506 of the IPC and has consequently registered the case in C.C. No.55895/2023.

2. The facts, in brief, as pleaded by the petitioner, are that the petitioner and one Harish are brothers. It is contended that ever since his marriage, the petitioner has been residing in the suit schedule property, which originally belonged to his father. The petitioner asserts that he has contributed substantial amounts to his father towards maintenance and family expenses. It is further contended that the father had entered into an arrangement with the petitioner agreeing to transfer the entire first floor of the house and one office room on the ground floor in his favour, pursuant to which the petitioner and his wife were put in possession of the said portions.

3. The petitioner further contends that his younger brother Harish had sought permission to use a portion of the first floor for storage purposes, which was acceded to by the petitioner. However, according to the petitioner, Harish, by influencing their parents, secured the property in his favour through a series of documents, including a gift deed, settlement deed and release deed. It is also contended that Harish had instituted O.S.No.1719/2015 seeking injunction and later attempted to implead the parents as additional plaintiffs, which was objected to by the petitioner, resulting in withdrawal of the suit. A subsequent suit in O.S. No.6844/2015 for declaration and possession was also filed and later withdrawn.

4. The petitioner alleges that on 12.12.2016, when he and his family had gone to church, Harish, in collusion with certain antisocial elements and two women, namely the present respondent–complainant and one Premakumari, forcibly trespassed into the house and threw out the petitioner’s belongings. It is contended that with police intervention, the petitioner regained entry into the premises and an FIR was registered in respect of the said incident.

5. It is further averred that the respondent–

complainant had instituted O.S.No.639/2016 seeking damages, which came to be dismissed. The appeal in RFA No.809/2018 preferred there against was subsequently withdrawn with liberty to seek reopening of O.S.No.6844/2015. It is also contended that Harish had filed W.P.No.8657/2017 seeking refund of court fee, which was dismissed. The petitioner further asserts that his mother initiated proceedings under the Senior Citizens Act as well as under the Prote