The FIR is registered against the petitioners for the

offence punishable under Sections 506, 34, 504, 354, 324 and

307 of IPC, alleging that the petitioners – accused forcibly

entered into the land belonging to the 2^nd respondent stating as

to why they are making illegal construction on the property

belonging to them and when the 2^nd respondent stated that she

is constructing the building on her land, at that point of time,

the petitioners – accused abused the 2^nd respondent in filthy

language and assaulted her with a sickle and outraged her

modesty. Taking exception to the same, this petition is filed.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

submits that the FIR was registered against the petitioners so

as to circumvent the order of temporary injunction granted

against the 2^nd respondent in OS No.28/2017. He further

submits that the FIR was filed only on the basis of omnibus and

- 3 -

general allegation. Hence, he submits that the FIR registered

only on the basis of general and omnibus allegation in the

absence of any corroborative material is without any substance.

3.

The

learned

High

Court

Government

Pleader

appearing for the respondent – State submits that the

allegation made in FIR discloses the commission of cognizable

offence and the allegation made in the FIR requires to be

investigated further and at this stage, the registration of FIR

cannot be interfered with. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the

petition.

4.

I have considered the submissions of the learned

counsel appearing for the parties.

5.

The petitioners – accused have produced the order

passed in OS No.28/2017 by the jurisdictional Civil Court

against the 2^nd respondent restraining her from interfering with

the peaceful possession of accused No.1 till disposal of the suit.

6.

The 2^nd respondent though served with notice has

remained absent and the FIR was lodged during the

subsistence of the order of temporary injunction so as to

circumvent the same.

- 4 -

7.

The allegation made in FIR arises out of civil

dispute, which is evident from the order passed in OS

No.28/2017, however, given criminal texture so as to

pressurize the petitioners – accused to arrive at a settlement.

8.

In view of the preceding analysis, the continuation

of investigation against the petitioners – accused will be an

abuse of process of law since the probability of the police filing

the charge sheet is remote and bleak since the dispute arises

between the parties is purely civil in nature. Accordingly, I

pass the following:

ORDER

i)

Criminal petition is allowed.

ii)

The

impugned

proceeding

in

Crime

No.2017

registered by the Banahatti PS insofar as it relates to

petitioners – accused No.1 to 3 is hereby quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

BKM

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 91