SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 56020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
SHRI CHIKKAREVANNA S/O. SHRI AJJAPP – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102608 OF 2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 102608 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS)

BETWEEN:

SHRI CHIKKAREVANNA S/O. SHRI AJJAPPA, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS/SOCIAL SERVICE, RESIDING AT ANJANEYANAGAR, RAMDURG, TAL. RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI, PIN CODE-591123.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI SURAJ S. MUTNAL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH THE RAMDURG POLICE, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD, PIN CODE-580011.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRAVEENA Y. DEVAREDDIYAVARA, HCGP)

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C.

KATTIMANI Location: HIGH (U/S.528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PRESENT PETITION COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD AND QUASH THE ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET REGISTERED FOR OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S.171(E), 188 OF IPC AND SECTION 7 R/W. 3, 6 OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION ACT 1986 AND ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.784/2023 (RAMDURG P.S. CRIME NO.81/2023) REGISTERED FOR ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 171(E) OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE AND SECTION 7 READ WITH SECTIONS 3 AND 6 OF THE RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS (PREVENTION OF MISUSE) ACT, 1988 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS AT RAMDURG, THE CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE SAME ARE PRODUCED AS ANNEXURES-A AND D, AS AGAINST THE ACCUSED NO.1/PETITIONER HEREIN AND ETC.

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

##PAGE2##

ORAL ORDER

PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T Heard Sri Suraj S.Mutnal, learned counsel for the petitioner/sole accused and Sri Praveena Y.Devareddiyavara, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent/

State.

2. The petitioner/accused has this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.” for short) / Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.784/2023 connection with Crime No.81/2023 of Ramdurg Police Station, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Ramdurg, Belagavi District, for the offences punishable under Section 171E and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC” for short”), Sections 3, 6 and 7 of the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988 (‘Act’, for short).

3. Brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:

##PAGE3##

The defacto complainant lodged complaint. The defacto complainant, who was appointed as an officer of the Flying Squad for Ramdurg Constituency, for the general election held in the year 2023, as per the order of the District Election Officer, for the Assembly election. On 20.04.2023 at about 03:00 p.m., there was a holy commemoration ceremony at Shree Revayyajjana Mutt, Obalapur Village, Ramdurg Taluk, on account of the commemoration ceremony held on 3rd Death Anniversary of Sri. Shivayya Swami. At that time, the petitioner/accused, who was contested for general election i.e. a candidate of Bharatiya Janata Party was present at the event, he actively participated in the stage program, which is a violation of model code of conduct. Further, the other participants and other leaders who attended said programme were raised slogans in his favour. The said act constitutes an attempt to unduly influence the electorate and violates the model code of conduct. Further, the petitioner/accused also made promise to the villagers to construct a building adjacent to the Durgamma Temple in Obalapura Village after the elections are over. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged the complaint against the petitioner.

##PAGE4##

4. On that basis, the FIR came to be registered and the matter was investigated and the charge sheet was laid against the petitioner. Taking exceptions to the same, the petitioner has filed this petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the registration of FIR initially and also the subsequent la

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top