Karnataka High Court
Rajesh. K. N vs State Of Karnataka on 15 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
WRIT PETITION NO. 17649 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9602 OF 2023
WRIT PETITION NO. 19851 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 23972 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
IN WP No. 17649/2023
BETWEEN:
SMT LALITHAMMA
W/O MUKUNDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS
SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED
AGRICULTURIST
R/O INDIRA NAGARA, NEAR WATER TANK
KOPPA AT AND POST
CHIKKAMAGALUR-577126
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.P.P.HEGDE, SR.COUNSEL FOR SMT.RACHITHA
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYAN
N
RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court of Karnataka
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH N R POLICE
REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT
PLEADER, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-560001
2. SRI BHARATH B Y
S/O B V YATHIRAJA
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
R/O HONAPURA, KOSALLI(P)
NIDIGE HOBLI, GAJANURU
SHIMOGGA-577202
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.SHARATH.S.GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER
DTD: 05.08.2023 PASSED BY THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, NR PURA IN C.C.NO. 271/2020 VIDE ANNX-E AND ETC.,
IN CRL.P NO. 9602/2023
BETWEEN:
1. SRI BHARATH B Y
S/O B Y YATHIRAJ,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT HOMAPURA VILLAGE,
HOSAHALLI POST, SHIMOGA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577202
2. B Y YATHIRAJ
S/O B M VENKATE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,
R/AT HOMAPURA VILLAGE,
HOSAHALLI POST, SHIMOGA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577202
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARATH S GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE BY R T NAGAR P S
J C NAGAR, SUB DIVISION,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
BANGALORE-560001
REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560001.
2. SRI MOHAMMED RAFI
S/O MOHAMMED KASIM,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/O NO 17, 10 A CROSS,
K H B MAIN ROAD, MANORAYANAPALYA,
R T NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560032
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.P.P.HEGDE, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI.VENKATESH
SUMAREDDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC BY THE
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO 1.QUASH
THE FIR AND PRIVATE COMPLAINT REGISTERED IN
CR.NO.49/2017 DATED 23.02.2017 BY THE RESPONDENT
POLICE R.T.NAGAR P.S., ON THE FILE OF 4TH A.C.M.M,
NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU CITY VIDE ANNEXURE A
AND B RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.,
IN WP NO. 19851/2023
BETWEEN:
MR OMKAR V B
S/O BADIYAPPAAGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT 20/2 SHANTHI BHAVANA
NARASIMHARAJAPURA TALUK,
BALE, CHIKKAMAGALURU-577 134
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.P.P.HEGDE, SR.COUNSEL FOR SRI.VENKATESH
SUMAREDDI, ADVOCATE)
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
NR PURA POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001
2. BHARATH B Y
S/O YATHIRAJ B V
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT HONNAPURA, HOSAHALLI POST,
NIDIGE HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA
KARNATAKA-577 201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.SHARATH.S.GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC 271/2020 ON THE FILE OF
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NARASIMHARAJAPURA VIDE
ANNEXURE-C REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE
U/S 35, 37, 201, 417, 419, 406, 420, 120B, 323, 506 R/W
34 OF IPC IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.
IN WP NO. 23972/2023
BETWEEN:
RAJESH. K. N.
S/O MUNKUNDEGOWDA,
AGED 37 YEARS,
R/A GADEKERE, SIDDARAMATH,
KOPPA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU 577126
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. PRAJWAL B PATIL, ADVOCATE)
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH N R PURA POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY
HIGH GOVERNMENT PLEADER
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BANGALORE-560001
2. BHARATH B Y
S/O YATHIRAJ B V,
R/A HONNAPURA, HOSAHALLI POST,
NIDIGE HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA-577202
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.LAKSHMAN, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI.SHARATH.S.GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.271/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-D
ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
NARASIMHARAJAPURA VIDE ANNEXURE-D REGISTERED
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 35, 37, 201, 417, 419,
406, 120B, 323, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC IN SO FAR
AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR DICTATING
ORDERS, THIS DAY ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
COMMON ORDER
W.P.No.23972/2023 and W.P.No.19851/2023 are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C, respectively by accused Nos.1 and 3, with a prayer to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.271/2020, on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC Narasimharajapura, for the offences punishable under Sections 35, 37, 201, 417, 419, 406, 120-B, 323, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC.
2. Petitioner in W.P.No.17649/2023 has challenged the order dated 20.02.2020 passed by the trial Court in the above case i.e, C.C No.271/2020 rejecting the application filed by her under Section 457 Cr.P.C and order dated 05.08.2023, partly allowing the application filed by respondent No.2/ complainant filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C and releasing part of the seized amount to his interim custody.
-7- NC: 2025:KHC:38993 WP No. 17649 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023 WP No. 19851 of 2023 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER 3. W.P.No.9602/2023 is filed by accused Nos. 1
and 2 under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them in C.C.No.7839/2018 arising out of Cr.No.49/2017 for the offences punishable and Sections 406, 420, 504, 506, 120-B r/w Section 34 IPC.
4. Since the facts giving rise to these petitions are interlinked and common, the petitions are clubbed together and disposed off by a common order.
5. In support of their petitions, accused Nos.1 and 3 of C.C No.271/2020 have contended that they are innocent of the offences alleged and have been falsely implicated. They are in no way connected to the alleged incident. There is no material to show that they are involved in the alleged incident. Except the allegations that they persuaded respondent No.2 to invest in the Rice pulling instrument, there are no allegations against them.
-8- NC: 2025:KHC:38993 WP No. 17649 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023 WP No. 19851 of 2023 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
Continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of the Court and hence, the petitions.
6. On the other hand learned counsel representing respondent No.2 and learned High Court Government Pleader representing respondent No.1 State would submit that respondent No.2 is an agriculturist. He came in contact with accused No.2 Nandan Kumar, who is his neighbour. In the last week of September 2016, when he visited the house of accused No.2 Nandan Kumar, in connection with festival feast, accused No.2 told him about Rice pulling instrument and that it is worth hundreds of Crores of rupees and that if he makes investment in the same, he could get handsome returns. Respondent No.2 brought this fact to the notice of his friend Imthiaz (CW-
2).
6.1 After one week, accused No.2 Nandan Kumar introduced him to accused No.3 Omkar @ Vijaykumar at N.R.Pura camp. He also said that there is huge profit -9- NC: 2025:KHC:38993 WP No. 17649 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023 WP No. 19851 of 2023 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER investing in Rice pulling instrument. They called a Swamiji over phone and all of them went to meet the said Swamiji. However, he was not available and directed them to visit Sadguru Sevashrama and that he would send Junior Swamiji. Accordingly, they went to Sadguru Sevashrama, Hosadurga and met a junior Swamiji. He also spoke about the Rice pulling instrument and collected the details of respondent No.2, so that he would see whether God is favouring him in the said business. Later accused No.3 Omkar @ Vijaykumar, informed respondent No.2 that Swamiji conveyed that it is favourable for respondent No.2 to invest.
6.2 On the next day they again went to Hosadurga and met accused Nos.2 and 3. They informed respondent No.2 that some company is interested in testing the Rice pulling instrument, but it requires Rs.40 - 45 lakhs. When accused Nos.2 and 3 called Senior Swamiji, he also confirmed the said fact. The Senior Swamiji refused to disclose his name. Respondent No.2 expressed his inability
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
and returned. However, after one week accused Nos.2 and 3 contacted him and said that a foreign company by name Verbund International, Ostria, U.K is interested and Dr.V.K.Singh, CEO of the said company are discussing about the same and took him to Bengaluru and introduced to accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and another at ITC International hotel. They informed that they are interested in testing the Rice pulling instrument and require Rs.45 lakhs and that everything would be done legally. He would be given a bungalow and a car at USA.
6.3 After returning to Hosadurga, respondent No.2 brought it to the notice of Swamiji, who in turn said that he would instruct junior Swamiji. They directed respondent No.2 to deposit Rs.45 lakhs after which the Rice pulling instrument would be shown to the company. On 20.10.2016, respondent No.2 withdrew Rs.24 lakhs from the account of his wife, added Rs.1,70,000/- from his account and collected Rs.3,00,000/- from his brother and borrowed Rs.19.3 lakhs from other members of his family
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
and relatives. Imthiaz contributed Rs.6 lakhs. Accused No.3 added Rs.15 lakhs on his behalf. All of them took Rs.45 lakhs to Bengaluru on 21.10.2016. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi collected the same and promised to bring the company people to Hosadurga.
6.4 On 25.10.2016, when they went to Hosadurga, accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers came in a Toyoto Fortuner car bearing registration No.KA-51/MA- 1040 and on the way met junior Swamiji. Junior Swamiji permitted only accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers to enter and took signatures of respondent No.2 to a number of papers saying that if they refuse, testing would not be done. After half an hour, the Senior Swamiji called over the phone and said that since the Rice pulling instrument emit radiation, they require a big jacket, for which Rs.1.10 Crores is required. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi informed respondent No.2 that Rice pulling instrument is very good and promise to get handsome returns.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
6.5 When respondent No.2 brought it to the notice of Swamiji, he said that he is having many people who are ready to invest, but since the God has favoured him, he has to bring in the money. Therefore, on 28.10.2016, accused No.3 Omkar @ Vijaykumar brought Rs.23 lakhs and respondent No.2 availed loan of Rs.50.5 lakhs and Imthiaz (CW-2) brought Rs.50,000/- and all of them went to Bengaluru and handed over the said amount to accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi at Lalith Ashok Hotel. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers collected the same and left. They brought this fact to the notice of Swamiji.
6.6 After 3-4 days, Swamiji called respondent No.2 over phone and informed that the owners of the land, where the Rice pulling instrument is found is demanding Rs.10 Crores and he has directed the company people to pay the said amount. When respondent No.2 called the company people, they said that after testing the Rice pulling instrument, they would shift it to somewhere else and company would pay him money. After 3-4 days, again
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers came to Hosadurga. Again respondent No.2 was stopped from going inside. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers and junior Swamiji took the signature of respondent No.2 to many blank stamp papers. Afterwards accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers and testers went inside. After one hour, junior Swamiji along with two farmers stated to be the owners of Rice pulling instrument went inside.
6.7 Later they were informed that the testers have examined the Rice pulling instrument by wearing big jacket and that it should be shifted to some other place within 2 hours, but the farmers are not permitting them to shift it. Though respondent No.2 tried to convince the farmers, they did not agree. The junior Swamiji called Senior Swamiji and he promised to convince the farmers. After 2.00 p.m, Swamiji called respondent No.2 and informed that he would pay Rs.10 Crores and invite the company people and sent him back.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
6.8 However, even after one month, there was no progress. Neither accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi nor the Swamiji were receiving his calls. They also did not return the money and blank stamp papers. Swamiji informed him that he has already paid Rs.10 Crores to the farmers and he may contact accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi. When he called accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi, he said that Rs.45 lakhs is required to pack the Rice pulling instrument. On 19.12.2016, accused No.3 Omkar @ Vijaykumar brought Rs.5 lakhs and respondent No.2 collected Rs.20 lakhs and went to Bengaluru and handed over the same to accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi. Accused No.3 Omkar @ Vijaykumar told respondent No.2 that he had already handed over Rs.5 lakhs to accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi in the morning itself.
6.9 On 21.12.2016, accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers took them near a small temple. Swamiji called respondent No.2 over phone and made him to wait outside. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and others again
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
took his signatures to number of blank stamp papers. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers and testers went inside and when they returned they took respondent No.2 in their car and said that the Rice pulling instrument would follow them. After they had covered 200 ft, 8-10 persons came in a car and bikes and block their way and assaulted them. They also broke the rear wing shield. Accused No.4 Mohammad Rafi and his followers gave threat that they would not get back their money and went away. The Swamiji also switched off his phone.
6.10 After 3 days, respondent No.2 received call from an anonymous person, stated to be a supporter of Swamiji and gave threat that if he file any complaint or make demand from the Swamiji, he and his father would not be left alive. Later, he came to know that accused No.2 Nandan Kumar has committed similar offence at Chikkamagalur, N.R.Pura, Shivamogga and Thirthahalli. CW-2 Imthiaz, accused Nos.2 and 3 used to come to a
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
farm house at Gajanur to discuss and he suspect their involvement.
7. Based on the complaint, the concerned police registered case in Cr.No.28/2017 and after conducting detailed investigation, filed charge sheet. During investigation, a sum of Rs.11,08,000/- is also recovered. The account of Smt.Lalithamma who is no other than the mother of accused No.1 Rajesh and applicant in W.P.No.17649/2023 is freezed. The investigation reveal involvement of accused Nos.1 to 10. Out of these accused, accused Nos.6 to 10 are absconding. In the light of prima facie material placed on record, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed and pray to dismiss the petition.
8. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the following decisions:
(i) Satvinder Kaur Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr. (Satvinder Kaur)1
(ii) Vesa Holdings Private Ltd. Vs. State of Kerala and Ors. (Vesa Holdings)2 1 (1999) 8 SCC 728 2 (2015) 8 SCC 293
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993 WP No. 17649 of 2023 C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023 WP No. 19851 of 2023 HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
(iii) Robert John D'Souza and Ors. Vs. Stephen V.Gomes and Anr. (Robert John D'Souza)3
(iv) Dr.Padma Priya Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr.
(Dr.Padma Priya)4
(v) Dr.Subbegowda B.K Vs. State of Karnataka and Anr. (Dr.Subbegowda B.K)5
9. In Crl.P No.9602/2023, Petitioner No.1 B.Y.Bharat, is no other than respondent No.2 in WP No.23972 and 19851/2023. Petitioner No.2 is his father. They are seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in CC No.7839/2018 on the file of 4th ACMM Bengaluru, contending that in the light of complaint filed by him against the accused persons in CC No.271/2020, a false complaint is filed against him and his father. The directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court "Priyanaka Shirvastava and others" are not followed. The allegations made are purely civil in nature it is trying to be given a cloak of criminal offence. Continuation of proceedings 3 (2015) 9 SCC 96 4 Crl.P.No.9745/2016 Dt: 12.07.2017 5 Crl.P.No.967/2020 Dt: 09.09.2022
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
would amount to abuse of process of Court and pray to allow the petition.
10. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 (Defacto Complainant) as well as learned High Court Government Pleader representing respondent No.1 State submit that petitioner Nos.1 and 2 who are accused Nos.1 and 2 came to be acquainted with respondent No.2 during 2016. Since they are engaged in real estate business, they were in the habit of borrowing money from respondent No.2 and return the same after retaining their profit. On 29.10.2016, they along with accused No.3 Vijay Kumar borrowed a sum of ₹40,00,000/- from complainant in front of Coffee Day shop situated on Tarala Balu Road, near BDA complex of RT Nagar, coming under the jurisdiction of RT Nagar police, under the pretext of purchasing a land and by not returning the same, they had cheated the complainant.
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
10.1 When complainant demanded them to
return the said amount, they gave threat to him through 10 telephonic call and said that if they demand the money back, they would be abducted and killed and thereby all the accused persons have committed the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC. It is further submitted by them that in this regard, complainant filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. On reference the concerned police investigated the matter and filed charge sheet. There is prima facie material to proceed against all the accused persons, including petitioners and pray to dismiss the petition.
11. So far as W.P.No.17649/2023 is concerned, petitioner Lalithamma has contended that based on complaint dated 24.03.2017 filed by Bharat B.Y, Cr.No.28/2017 came to be registered by the NR.Pura police. During investigation, the concerned police have seized ₹6 lakhs and a Volkswagen car in PF.No.42/2017
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
dated 28.03.2017. They have further seized ₹1,00,000/- from accused No.2 Nandakumar in PF.No.44/2017 dated 01.04.2017. They further seized Maruti Swift car in PF.No.50/2017 and an amount of ₹2,08,000/- in PF.No.51/2017 and a Royal Enfield bike, approximately worth ₹1,75,000/- in PF.No.52/2017 dated 06.04.2017 from accused No.3 Omkara. They have also seized ₹2,00,000/- in PF.No.56/2017 dated 17.04.2017.
11.1 Accused No.1 K.N Rajesh is the son of petitioner Lalithamma. Initially, he was not arraigned as accused in the FIR. Based on the further statement of respondent No.2/ complainant dated 26.03.2017, he was arraigned as accused No.1, alleging that he made the complaint to invest ₹94, lakhs and one Imtiaz Ahmed, to invest ₹6 lakhs into rice, pulling business and ultimately, when he demanded back the money, accused No.1 sent people to assault the complainant and gave threat of killing him. It is alleged that out of ₹94 lakhs, accused No.1 K.N Rajesh has retained ₹64,50,000/- and distributed
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
the remaining amount among the other accused. It is alleged that accused No.1 K N Rajesh gave ₹50 lakhs to his uncle Parameshwar and from the account of said Parmeshwar, the said amount was transferred to the account of Lalitha held in Kodagu Grameena Bank.
11.2 Parmeshwar has transferred ₹50 lakhs on 20.06.2018 through cheque No.426019, and ₹20 lakhs on 30.06.2018 through cheque number 350826. Through letter dated 7.8.2018, the account of petitioner Lalithamma, held in Karnataka Gramin Bank, N.R Pura branch is frozen. She filed application under Section 457 Cr.P.C to defreeze her account and permit her to transact the same and complainant Bharat also filed application under Section 457 Cr.P.C to release 60 lakhs from the account of Lalitamma to him. During crime stage by common order dated 20.02.2020, the trial Court rejected both applications. Later, complainant filed application under Section 457 Cr.P.C in C.C.No.271/2020. Vide order dated 05.08.2023, the trial Court allowed the application
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
filed by the complainant. Aggrieved by the both orders, petitioner has challenged them on the following among other:
GROUNDS The Petitioner Lalithamma has nothing to do with a crime. The amount deposited in the account is originated from the sale of the property belonging to her brother Parmeshwarappa. He sold the properties in the year 2017 by entering into a sale agreement with A.S.Krishnaiah. In turn Parmeshwar transferred ₹50 lakhs to the account of petitioner as she was not given any family property. Without any cogent evidence to prove involvement of accused number one, the concerned police have frozen the account of petitioner Lalithamma. There is no evidence to connect the amount in the account of Lalithamma, to the crime in question. The transaction between Lalithamma and Parmeshwar is in the year 2018, whereas the offence is of the year 2017 and hence the petition.
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
12. Learned counsel appearing for respondent
No./complainant Bharat B.Y, has filed statement of
objections stating that the petition is not maintainable either in law or on facts and liable to be dismissed. In this petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 05.08.2023, whereby trial Court allowed the application filed by the complainant respondent No.2 directing the investigating officer to handover interim custody of ₹6 lakhs in PF 42/2017, ₹1,00,00 in PF 44/2017, ₹2,08,000 in PF.51/2017 and ₹50,00,000/- by defreezing the account of petitioner in the Account at Kaveri Grameena Bank, N.R Pura, Chikkamagaluru District.
12.1 In this petition, the petitioner has also questioned the order dated 20.02.2020 in dismissing her application for defreezing her account. The charge sheet filed against the son of petitioner Lalithamma clearly indicates that complainant Bharat B.Y was relieved of ₹94,50,000/-
under a promise that the same would be invested in the rice pulling instrument and thereby he would get return in
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
Crores of Rupees. He was also made to sign several blank stamp papers, making him to believe that it is required to enter into an agreement with a company, testing the rice pulling instrument. Believing the words of accused, complainant borrowed loan of ₹24 lakhs on 20.10.2016, ₹50,50,000/- on 28.10.2016 and ₹20 lakhs on 19.12.2016.
12.2 After realising that he has been cheated, respondent No.2 filed complaint, based on which Cr.No.28/2017 was registered and ultimately charge sheet was filed against all the accused persons, including the son of petitioner, Lalithamma. During investigation, some of the proceeds of the crime were seized. The accused person had no independent source of income to prove that the seized amount belongs to them. The investigation also revealed that out of ₹64,50,000/- retained by him, accused No.1 has given ₹50 lakhs to Parameshwar who in turn kept it in the account of petitioner Lalithamma in Kaveri Grameena Bank. At the crime stage, the application
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
filed by Lalithamma as well as complainant Bharat B.Y were rejected. However, after the charge sheet was filed in the changed circumstances, the application of respondent No.2 was allowed. Petitioner Lalithamma failed to challenge the order rejecting her application, but after the application filed by respondent No.2 came to be allowed, she has choosen to challenge both orders. On the ground of delay and latches, the prayer for rejection of application dated 20.02.2020 is liable to be dismissed in limini.
12.3 Petitioner has not produced any documents to show the source of ₹50 lakhs. The documents clearly indicate that out of ₹64,50,000/- accused No.1 has paid ₹50 lakhs to the his uncle Parameshwara and in turn he has kept the said amount in the account of Lalithamma. It is an outcome of the crime. On the other hand, there is material to show that respondent No.2 was deceived of ₹94,50,000/-. Out of the said amount he had borrowed ₹50 lakhs from Rushya Shrunga Adike Mandi and on
- 26 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
28.10.2016 it was transferred to the A/c
No.2562500100154301 of complainant's father in
Karnataka Bank Ltd, Gajanuru Branch and on the same day, the said amount was withdrawn. On the same day, ₹50,50,000/- was paid to the accused persons. Similarly, the remaining amount is also given to the accused persons on subsequent dates by availing hand loan.
12.4 When the lenders exerted pressure on the respondent No.2/complainant Bharat B.Y, he has sold agricultural lands in Sarya village for repaying the loan as per the sale deed dated 20.12.2018. During the course of investigation, accused persons have given voluntary statement regarding ₹50 lakhs deposited in the petitioners account. Petitioner who is the mother of accused No.1 is not having any source of income and her bank statement shows that there were no previous transactions and ₹50 lakhs is a stray deposit in the account. Considering all these aspects, the trial Court has rightly passed the order.
- 27 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
12.5 The order for release of the amount is
conditional, subject to execution of the personal bond and indemnity bond for ₹60 lakhs. He has also given an undertaking that out of the said amount he would re- purchase the land sold under the sale deed dated 20.12.2018 and deposit the title deeds. Since the complainant is a victim of the crime and relieved of the amount, he is entitled for interim custody. Intentionally, the petitioner has not produced the entire order but has only produced the operative portion. The trial Court has rightly held that there are no documents to show that Parameshwar was owning the properties which he has sold through the sale deeds. Taking into consideration all these aspects, the trial Court has rightly rejected the application filed by Lalithamma and allowed the application filed by complainant Bharat B.Y and pray to reject the petition filed by petitioner Lalithamma.
13. Heard arguments and produced the record.
- 28 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
14. From the documents in C.C.No.271/2020, it is evident that though ultimately complaint came to be filed in 2017, long before it, from August 2016, accused Nos.1 to 5 entered into a conspiracy and complainant Bharat B.Y and CW-2 Imtiaz were brain washed about the rice pulling instrument, saying that if investment is made in the said instrument, they would earn Crores of Rupees. They also represented that a Senior Swamiji of a very famous Matt is also involved. In fact, accused No.6 disguised as junior Pontiff and made the complainant and CW-2 Imtiaz to believe that rice pulling instrument exists and if it is examined by foreigners, they would invest Crores of Rupees and in that way, complainant and others who invest would get back their investment with large amount of profit. Accused persons managed to get ₹24 lakhs from complainant and ₹6 lakhs from CW-2 Imtiaz on 20.10.2016. Similarly, complainant Bharat B.Y paid ₹50.5 lakhs on 28.10.2016 and ₹20 lakhs on 19.12.2016. After realising that he has been cheated, when complainant
- 29 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
Bharat B.Y demanded back the money, on 21.12.2016, he was called near Ramco cement factory of Hosadurga and assaulted and given threat to his life.
15. Charge sheet reveal that accused No.1 Rajesh is the main accused and through the other accused persons, he trapped complainant Bharat B.Y to invest lakhs of Rupees. Out of the money received, he has handed over ₹50 lakhs to his maternal uncle Parameshwarappa, who in turn has deposited the same into the account of Lalithamma. Accused No.3 Omkara @ Vijay Kumar on the directions of accused No.1 interacted with complainant Bharat B.Y about the alleged rice pulling instrument and collected in all ₹94,50,000/- from complainant Bharat B.Y and ₹6 lakhs from CW-2 Imtiaz. In addition, he also acted as though he is one of the customers. He has also shared the proceeds of the crime i.e, ₹10 lakhs and out of it, has credited ₹2.08 lakhs in his Karnataka Bank account and also purchased a Royal Enfield bike. He also falsely implicated One Manjunath and Shivu @ Sivakumar to
- 30 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
mislead the investigation. The other accused persons
cooperated with accused No.1 in order to deceive
complainant Bharat B.Y and CW-2 Imtiaz into paying Crores of Rupees. In the light of the detailed investigation conducted by the concerned police, the criminal proceedings against all the accused persons, including petitioners i.e., accused Nos.1 and 3 cannot be quashed and as such W.P.No.23972/2023 and W.P.No.19851/2023 are liable to be dismissed.
16. Now coming to the petition filed by Smt Lalithamma, who is no other than the mother of accused No.1 Rajesh. During the course of investigation in Cr.No.28/2017, which ultimately culminated in filing charge sheet in C.C.No.271/2020, the investigating officer has recovered a total sum of Rs.6 lakhs and a Volkswagen car in PF.No.42/2017. This recovery is made based on the allegations in the complaint as well as the fact that complainant was able to point out the source from which he was able to invest Rs.6 lakhs. Accordingly on the basis
- 31 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
of voluntary statement of accused No.1, a sum of ₹50 lakhs were traced to the account of Lalithamma through her brother Parameshwarappa. Petitioner Lalithamma has claimed that this amount was paid to her by her brother Parmeshwarappa as her share in the joint family properties, and therefore she is entitled for interim custody of the same.
17. In order to evidence this fact, she has relied upon sale agreement dated 28.10.2017, 21.04.2018, 31.10.2017 and one more sale agreement dated 28.10.2017. At the outset, it is relevant to note that these sale agreements and sale deeds are by Parmeshwarappa and Raghunandan, who are the brothers of Lalithamma and their family members. It is relevant to note that in these documents, the property which is sold is described as the self acquired properties of Parameshwarappa and Raghunandan and it is stated that these properties are sold to repay the loan incurred in the Society. No where in these documents, there is any reference to Lalithamma
- 32 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
having share or they were having any property and in lieu of the share of Lalithamma, she is being given ₹50 lakhs out of the sale proceeds. Admittedly, Lalithamma is not a party to these transactions.
18. It is also relevant to note that the alleged cheating and trapping of complainant Bharat B.Y and CW-2 Imtiaz started in August 2016. These documents are subsequent to the said cheating, which was systematically continued till the complaint was filed. Moreover, as rightly pointed out by the trial Court, there are no documents to show that Parmeshwarappa and Raghunandan owned these properties. It does not stand to reason that if ₹50 lakhs credited to the account of Lalithamma was her share, there was no impediment for the parties to enter into a partition deed. It appears to overcome and wriggle out of the situation, these documents are created and the credit is made into the account of Lalithamma.
- 33 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
19. The investigating officer has successfully traced the proceeds of the crime into the account of Lalithamma. On the other hand, the investigation also establish the fact that complainant Bharat B.Y went to the extent of borrowing loan from the Society through his father and also selling his property to invest into the rice pulling instrument and fell into the trap laid by the accused persons. Therefore, the trial Court is justified in permitting complainant Bharat B.Y to receive ₹50 lakhs to his interim custody so that he could purchase back the property which he has sold. Of course, the trial Court has made sure that the necessary indemnity bond and surety are furnished and also, the sale deed is to be kept in the Court by way of security for the amount taken to his interim custody. It is very unfortunate that in order to help accused No.1, not only his mother, but also his maternal uncles are involved in shielding him.
20. Now coming to the petition filed by Bharat B.Y and his father seeking quashing of criminal proceeding
- 34 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
initiated against them in C.C.No.7839/2018 arising out of Cr.No.49/2017. It is pertinent to note that these proceedings were initiated based on the private complaint filed by Mohammed Rafi on 09.02.2017, alleging that Bharat B.Y and his father used to borrow money from him for real estate business and in that connection, they were due in a sum of ₹40 lakhs and when he demanded back the said money, they gave threat of abducting and killing him.
21. At the outset, it is relevant to note that as per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Priyanka Srivastava and Anr. Vs. State of U.P and Ors. (Priyanka Srivastava)6 the said Mohammed Rafi has not filed any police complaint before Jurisdictional police and on their failure to register the case and take action, he has also not approached the higher police officers, so as to say that on their failure he has chosen to file the private complaint. Consequently, there are no averments to this effect in the 6 2015(6) SCC 287
- 35 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
private complaint. He has straightaway filed the private complaint.
22. The trial Court also without examining these aspect, has referred the complaint for investigation. The investigating officer also except recording the statements of some witnesses has not collected any evidence as to the capacity of complainant to lend lakhs of rupees as loan to Bharat B.Y and his father. If at all complainant had lent such huge amount, at least he could have, got some documents executed by them. He could have at least got some cheques or pronote and other documents. It is also relevant to note that this complaint is subsequent to the Bharat BY demanding back the money paid by him to the accused persons in Cr.No.28/2017. At least the investigating officer ought to have collected some evidence to show that complainant Mohammed Rafi was in a position to lend such huge sum of ₹40 lakhs, though in instalments and whether he has acted as a prudent person in advancing such huge amount.
- 36 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
23. In the complaint, Mohammed Rafi has stated that he paid ₹40 lakhs to Bharat B.Y and his father borrowing from his friends and relatives and also by selling gold ornaments of his wife. The investigating officer has not conducted any investigation on this aspect and consequently has not collected any evidence. At least the investigating officer could have collected evidence of the person from whom Mohammed Rafi has borrowed and also the evidence regarding sale of gold ornaments belonging to his wife. In fact, this Mohammed Rafi is no other than accused No.1 in the complaint filed by Bharat B.Y (in the crime stage). In the charge sheet he is arraigned accused No.4. It appears anticipating some action being taken against the accused persons in Cr.No.28/2017, Mohammed Rafi has filed this private complaint, without approaching the concerned police. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, continuation of the criminal proceedings against Bharath B.Y and his father would
- 37 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
amount to abuse of the process of the Court and as such liable to be quashed and accordingly the following:
ORDER
(i) W.P.No.23972/2023 filed by petitioner/accused No.1 Rajesh K.N and W.P.No.19851/2023 filed by petitioner/accused No.3 Omkara V.B under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C, are hereby rejected.
(ii) Similarly, W.P.No.17649/2023 filed by applicant Lalithamma for de-freezing her account and permitting her to withdraw Rs.50 lakhs is rejected.
(iii) Crl.P.No.9602/2023 filed by petitioner/accused No.1 Bharat B.Y and petitioner/accused No.2 B.Y.Yatishraj is allowed.
- 38 -
NC: 2025:KHC:38993
WP No. 17649 of 2023
C/W CRL.P No. 9602 of 2023
WP No. 19851 of 2023
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
(iv) The criminal proceedings initiated against petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 in Cr.No.49/2017 of R.T.Nagar PS for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 506, 120-B, r/w Section 34 IPC is hereby quashed.
In view of disposal of petitions, pending application/s, if any, stands disposed off, as no separate order is required.
Sd/-
(J.M.KHAZI) JUDGE RR