##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 16549 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)-)

BETWEEN:

1. DHEERAJ G KUNDER S/O GOPALAKRISHNA M. AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT, NO.CL-3-26B, NITK CAMPUS, SURATHKAL, SRINIVASA NAGAR, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT-575 025

2. SHRAVAN, S/O M. SURESH. AGED 23 YEARS. R/AT NO.5-13/6, 5^TH BLOCK, KRISHNAPURA, KATIPALLA, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT- 575 030

3. ROSHAN, S/O NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT NO.4-202, KATIPALLA, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT-575 030

4. SOHAN, S/O SADASHIVA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT NO. GL-3-238/1, 3^RD BLOCK, KATIPALLA, MANGALURU, D.K. DISTRICT-575 030

##PAGE2##

5. AJITH @ GUNAPAL POONJA, S/O LOKANATH POONJA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT NADUMANE, B.T. ROAD, UPPALA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, KERALA STATE -671 322 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K RAVISHANKAR., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY D.K. CENTRAL CRIME, MANGALURU CITY, D.K. DISTRICT-575 001 AND ALSO REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU 560 001

2.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RANJITH KUMAR., HCGP FOR R1)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S

528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.NO.899/2024 (CR.NO.5/2020) REGISTERED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT POLICE AS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S. 66(C) AND 67 OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT 2008 NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, PUTTUR D.K.

##PAGE3##

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER

1. Learned HCGP has filed a memo enclosing the FSL report. His submission is that the FSL did not have the facility to verify.

2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

Quash the entire proceedings in CC.No.899/2024 (Cr.No.5/2020) registered by the 1^st respondent police as against the petitioners for the offences p/u/s. 66(c) and 67 of the Information Technology Act 2008 now pending on the file of the Prl.Civil Judge and JMFC, Puttur D.K.

3. The present petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the charge sheet filed against the petitioners in Crime No. 5/2020 of D.K. Central Crime Police Station. The said crime was registered on 06.03.2020 on the basis of a complaint lodged by respondent No. 2 for offences punishable under Sections 66(C) and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IT Act’). Upon completion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed on 17.07.2024. The petitioners seek quashing of the said proceedings.

##PAGE4##

4. The complaint lodged by respondent No. 2 alleges that she was working as a lecturer at St. Philomina College, Puttur, and had an Instagram account. According to the complaint, unknown persons used her Instagram ID and a photograph available on that account to circulate an obscene video in a WhatsApp group named ‘Bad Boys’. Thereafter, the Instagram ID, photograph and video were circulated in other WhatsApp groups. Respondent No. 2 further alleged that she began receiving messages on her Instagram account in connection with the said circulation. On these allegations, she lodged the complaint, which resulted in registration of the crime.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri K.

Ravishankar, submits that the photograph available on the Instagram account of respondent No. 2 and the person shown in the indecent video are different. According to him, the circulation of the photograph and Instagram ID of respondent No. 2, without any material establishing that she is the person shown in the video, does not attract the offences alleged under the IT Act. It is therefore contended that the allegations in the complaint do not make out the offences against the petitioners.

##PAGE5##

6. Having regard to the said submission, the learned High Court Government Pleader was