Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 25689

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.103195 OF 2025
(482 OF Cr.PC/528 OF BNSS)

BETWEEN:

1. ALLABAKSHI S/O. NIJAMSAB,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: SHOP EMPLOYEE,
R/O. ULENOOR VILLAGE, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

2. TAAJAR @ TAJUDDIN S/O. NIJAMSAB,
AGE: 26 YEARS OCC: FARMER,
R/O. ULENOOR VILLAGE, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

3. MOULASAB S/O. NIJAMSAB,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: SHOP EMPLOYEE,
R/O. ULENOOR VILLAGE, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

4. SMT. CHANANABHI @ CHAMANABHI
W/O. NIJAMSAB, AGE: 52 YEARS,
OCC: LABOURER, R/O. ULENOOR VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

5. YAMANURAPPA S/O. LATE SANNA SUNKLAYYA,
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: FARMER,
R/O. ULENOOR VILLAGE, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI J. S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH GANGAVATHI TOWN P.S.,
DIST. KOPPAL, REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BENCH AT: DHARWAD.

2. SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI W/O. TIPPANNA NAYAKA,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: SOCIAL WORKER,
R/O. ULENOOR VILLAGE, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

3. JAMADAGNI S/O. SANNA HULAGAPPA,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: FARMER,
R/O. KARATAGI, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

4. NAGAPPA S/O. HANUMAPPA,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: FARMER,
R/O. MARLANAHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

5. PARASHURAM S/O. PAMAPPA,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. NANDIHALLI VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

6. GALEPPA S/O. BOODEMMA,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. INDIRA NAGAR, KARATAGI,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

7. ERESH S/O. BHIMAPPA DODDAMANI,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. HULKIHAL VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

8. BASAVARAJ S/O. HAMPAMMA
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: FARMER,
R/O. HANAVAL VILLAGE, TQ. GANGAVATHI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

9. DODDA GALEPPA S/O. BOODEMMA,
AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. INDIRA NAGAR, KARATAGI,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

10. SHARANAPPA S/O. BASAPPA,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. SOMANAL VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

11. HANUMANTHA S/O. YALLAPPA,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. INDIRA NAGAR, KARATAGI,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

12. DURUGAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA,
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. KUNTOGI VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

13. SHIVAPPA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. KAKKARAGOLA VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

14. SHEKHARAPPA S/O. SHANKRAPPA,
AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. GUNDUR VILLAGE, TQ. KARTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

15. SHIVAKUMAR S/O. VEERESHAPPA,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: LABOURER,
R/O. BUDAGUMPA VILLAGE,
TQ. KARTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583229.

...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI DAYANAND SANGRESHI, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI N. D. GUNDE, ADV. FOR R2, R3, R5, R6 & R11;
NOTICE TO R4, R7 TO R15 ARE SERVED)

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J. S. Shetty
For the Respondents: Dayanand Sangreshi, N. D. Gunde

Disputed questions of fact, such as an individual's caste status or the veracity of allegations in an FIR, cannot be adjudicated in a petition for quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; such matters must be determined through a full trial, provided the prosecution demonstrates a prima facie case.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - S. 482 - Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - S. 528 - Quashing of proceedings - Disputes regarding caste status and pending enquiry before Civil Rights Enforcement Cell are disputed questions of fact to be decided during trial and not grounds for quashing proceedings under S. 482 Cr.P.C. (Paras 9, 10, 12, 13).

(B) Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - S. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Where the complaint and charge sheet materials disclose a prima facie case against the accused, the Court will not interfere with the trial proceedings. However, if an accused is not named in the complaint or charge sheet and no material is produced against them, the proceedings against such individual are liable to be quashed. (Para 14).

Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them for offences under the BNS and the SC/ST (POA) Act. It was alleged that the accused abused the complainant with reference to her caste and assaulted her. Counsel for petitioners argued the complaint was false and an abuse of process, citing ongoing disputes and a pending enquiry regarding the complainant’s caste status.

Findings of Court:
The court held that disputed questions of fact regarding the community of the complainant cannot be determined during a petition under S. 482 Cr.P.C. As there was a prima facie case against most petitioners, their plea was dismissed. However, as one petitioner was not named in the complaint or charge sheet, the proceedings against her were quashed.

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed based on disputed facts regarding the complainant's caste status and the alleged abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi: Disputed questions of fact requiring trial cannot be adjudicated in proceedings under S. 482 Cr.P.C., and proceedings are only liable to be quashed where there is no prima facie material against the specific accused.

Result: Petition allowed-in-part.

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, (U/S.528 OF BNSS, 2023) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THEM IN SPL.C.SC/ST NO.10/2025 (ARISING OUT OF CRIME NO. 127/2025 OF KARATAGI PS) PENDING BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOPPAL, SITTING AT GANGAVATI, FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 189(2), 191(2), 352, 351(2), 190 OF BNS AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v-a) OF THE SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989, BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL PETITION.

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

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

ORAL ORDER

Though the petition is listed for admission, with consent of both the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

2. This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.)/528 of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), praying to quash the entire proceedings initiated against them, with the following prayer:

“PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 5 humbly pray that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to Quash the entire proceedings initiated against them in Spl.C.SC/ST No. 10/2025 (arising out of Crime No. 127/2025 of Karatagi PS) pending before the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Koppal, sitting at Gangavati, for offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 352, 351(2), 190 of BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989, by allowing this criminal petition.”

3. It is the brief case of prosecution as per the complaint averments that the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 have been propounding that the complainant does not belong to Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes community, but belongs to Madivala Caste, which is non SC and ST community and there is frequent quarrels between them and in this regard many complaints and counter complaints are foisted and ultimately on 08.02.2025 all the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 abused the complainant with reference to caste and also in filthy language and assaulted the complainant. Therefore, the complaint was lodged for the offences as above stated.

4. Heard the arguments from both sides and perused the materials available at this stage produced before the Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 submitted that the entire complaint averments are false and are nothing but abuse of process of the Court. Further, it is submitted that on previous occasions also, there were cases and counter cases, in which the complainants have turned hostile and wherein acquittal was in favour of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5. When this being the fact, the complainant is in the habit of filing false complaints; therefore, it is nothing but abuse of process of the Court.

6. Further submitted that an enquiry is pending against the complainant so as to whether she belongs to Scheduled Tribes community or not; therefore, it is an assertion of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 that the complainant does not belong to ST community. Therefore, prays to quash the proceedings.

7. On the other hand, learned HCGP appearing on behalf of respondent No.1/State and learned counsel appearing on behalf respondent Nos.2, 3, 5, 6 and 11 submitted that the complainant belongs to Scheduled Tribes community. The petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 5 have initiated a false enquiry against the complainant trying to malign the reputation of the complainant by making false complaint that the complainant is not belonging to the Scheduled Tribes community. When the petitioners have failed previously in several attempts once again committed the offences alleged. Therefore, the complaint was lodged.

8. Further submitted that upon bare perusal of the complaint, it makes out sufficient grounds for the trial and accordingly, the charge sheet is filed during the investigation.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document