IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2588 OF 2026 (482(Cr.PC) /

528(BNSS)-)

BETWEEN:

1. MURALI K B S/O BASAVARAJU AGED 38 YEARS, 2. KEMPARAJU D.K.

S/O LATE DODDAKEMPAIAH AGED 31 YEARS, 3. MUNIRAJU B. S/O BASAVARAJU AGED 40 YEARS, 4. MADHUSUDHAN M.

S/O MUNISHAMANNA Digitally signed by AGED 34 YEARS, SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: HIGH 5. ANANDK COURT OF KARNATAKA S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA AGED 38 YEARS, 6. MANJUNATH H S/O HULLARAPPA AGED 34 YEARS, 7. ANIL S/O VENKATAPATHI AGED 33 YEARS, 8. HARSHA S/O VENKATAPATHI AGED 29 YEARS, 9. SUNIL M.

S/O MUNISHAMANNA AGED 33 YEARS, 10. NARENDRA R. S/O LATE RAJANNA AGED 30 YEARS, 11. KEMPARAJU S/O LATE JULAPPA @ MARIYAPPA AGED 39 YEARS, 12. JUNJAPPA S/O LATE BILIAPPA AGED 61 YEARS, 13. UMESHA @ DODDANNA S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED 34 YEARS, 14. HEMA (WRONGLY SHOWN AS SUDHA IN FIR)

W/O KEMPARAJ AGED 27 YEARS, 15. UMESH H M W/O RAMAMURTHY AGED 37 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT KANNURAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT-562114 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR C..,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA HOSKOTE POLICE STATION HOSKOTE SUB DIVISION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, REPTD. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR/

GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560001

2. PRADEEP S/O KATAPPA AGED 35 YEARS, R/AT KANNURAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT-562114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;

SRI. K.N. NARAYANASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN SPL.C.NO.1028/2024 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.295/2024, FILED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 POLICE AND ALSO THE ORDER DTD.08-12-2025, WHEREIN THE HONBLE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, HAS TAKEN COGNIZANCE AGAINST THE PETITIONERS / ACCUSED FOR THE O/P/U/S 118(1), 118(2), 352, 351(1), 351(2), 115(2), 189(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 191(2) OF THE BNS 2023 AND SEC. 3(1)(r)(s) OF SC ST POA ACT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court seeking quashment of the proceedings in Spl.C.No.1028/2024, pending before the II Additional District and Sessions Court, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 118(2), 352, 351(1), 351(2), 115(2), 189(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190 and 191(2) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (‘the Act’ for short).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 in unison submit that during the pendency of the case, the parties to the lis have settled the dispute and file an interlocutory application in I.A.No.2/2026, under Section 482 r/w. 320(2) of the Cr.P.C., along with separate affidavits of the parties, seeking permission to compound the offences alleged by respondent No.2, the complainant.

3. Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor would contend that the issue in the lis concerning the offence ones punishable under the Act and therefore, settlement should not be accepted. The petitioners have to undergo trial and come out clean. He seeks dismissal of the petition.

4. The application reads as follows:

“3. The petitioners and the Complainant in the above case have filed this Joint Memo before this Hon'ble Court and expressed in unequivocal terms that they have signed the Joint Compromise Memo on their own free will and volition.

4. It is submitted that the petitioners have filed this Application for compound the offence, the Complainant has, on his own free will, without any compulsion, entered into a compromise and he has no objection for compound the offence with the petitioners.

5. It is submitted that the petitioners and Complainant are residing in the same village.

PRAYER WHEREFORE, the petitioners and Complainant/Respondent No.2 most humbly subm