Karnataka High Court
Mavalli Shankar vs State Of Karnataka on 3 February, 2025
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822
WP No. 35064 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 35064 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. MAVALLI SHANKAR
S/O MUNISWAMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
NO. 151, 9TH CROSS,
LALBAGH FORT ROAD,
DODDA MAVALLI,
BENGALURU - 560 004.
2. DR. BHANU PRAKASH
S/O SHANKARAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
NO. 160, 10TH MAIN, ISRO LAYOUT,
BANGALORE-560 011.
3. SMT. REVATHI RAJ
Digitally W/O RAJENDRA,
signed by AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
VANAMALA
N NO. 139, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
Location: SHESHADRIPURAM,
HIGH BANGALORE-560 020.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
4. GM. NAGARAJU
S/O J C NARASAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS,
NO. 37/A, EMS BHAVAN,
MAHALAXMI LAYOUT,
BANGALORE - 560 086.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822
WP No. 35064 of 2024
5. VINAY K SREENIVAS
S/O SREENIVAS GUPTA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
NO. 8, BHARATH BHAVAN,
INFANTRY ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001.
6. K SHIVARAMEGOWDA
S/O H HUCHEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS NO.
31, 9TH CROSS,
SWIMMING POOL EXTENSION,
MALLESWARAM,
BANGALORE-560 003.
7. DUSHYANTH DHUBE
S/O RAJESH DHUBE,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
MICHAEL PALYA, INDIRANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 038.
8. GANGADARA MULAGUNDA
S/O. Y F MULAGUNDHA,
AGED ABOUT 43YRS,
NO. 15, 5TH CROSS, SRIRAMPURA,
JAKKUR POST, BANGALORE 560064.
9. BABU @KN RAO
S/O GURUSWAMY NAIDU,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
NO. 8 HANUMA HILL'S LAYOUT,
5TH MAIN, AREHALLI, BANGALORE-560 061.
10. CHANDRIKA. B
D/O NAGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
NO. 71, KSCB QUARTERS,
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822
WP No. 35064 of 2024
KAVERI NAGAR, LAGGERE,
BANGALORE-560058.
11. LIYONO LUYIS @ LEON LEWIS
S/O LEWIS SAGAYA RAJ,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
NO. 105, 3RD CROSS, CV RAMAN NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560093.
12. KAILASH KAUSHIK
S/O KV SHANKAR,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
NO. C 1/708, SOUTH CITY,
JP NAGAR, BANGALORE-560076.
13. KAPIL
S/O RAMESH KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
NO. S-8, D BLOCK, IASE,
MALLESHWARAM,
BANGALORE-560 003.
14. YASHASWI
S/O. GN NAGARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
NO. 235, NANDINI LAYOUT, 17TH MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE-560096.
15. ARVIND @ ARVIND NARRAIN
S/O SATHYANARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT NO.122/4
INFANTRY ROAD
BANGALORE-560001,
16. SHARATH
S/O BASAVARAJU
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822
WP No. 35064 of 2024
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS NO 218
BHARATH BHAVAN
INFANTRY ROAD
BENGALURU-560001.
17. ARJUN GOWDA
S/O KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
CHIKKASAADENAHALLI,
KANAKAPURA,
RAMANAGARA - 561 121.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. SRUTI C CHAGANTI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HIGHGROUNDS POLICE STATION
REPRESENTED BY THE SPECIAL
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI.THEJESH P., HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CODE
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED 10.10.2023 TAKING COGNIZANCE OF OFFENCES UNDER
SECTION 188 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860, AND SECTION
103 OF THE KARNATAKA POLICE ACT, 1963 AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS AND THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.27925/2023
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED I ADDITIONAL CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE, PRODUCED
HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A CONCERNED ONLY TO THESE
PETITIONER.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822
WP No. 35064 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, the petitioners seek the following relief:
"Quash the order dated 10.10.2023 taking cognizance of offences under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 103 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 against the Petitioners and the proceedings in C.C.No.27925/2023 pending on the file of the Learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, produced herewith as ANNEXURE-A; concerns only to these petitioners."
2. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned proceedings as against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC is not preceded by a complaint by the officer competent under Section 195 of Cr.P.C to file a complaint in the absence of which, the impugned proceedings in relation to Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [for short, 'IPC'] -6- NC: 2025:KHC:4822 WP No. 35064 of 2024 deserve to be quashed. It is also submitted that insofar as the offence punishable under Section 103 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963 [for short, 'KP Act'] is concerned, the said offence not being severable from the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC, the impugned proceedings in relation to the offence punishable under Section 103 of KP Act would also deserve to be quashed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance upon the following four judgments of this Court.
• Sri Rajashekharananda Swamiji and Another Vs. the State of Karnataka in W.P.No.13328/2018 [GM- RES] decided on 18.06.2021.
• Sharath Bacchegowda and Others Vs. State by Hosakate P S and Another in Crl.P.No.6878/2023 decided on 24.08.2023.
• Umesh Shetty Vs. State of Karnataka in Crl.P.No.7228/2023 c/w W.P.No.14239/2023 decided on 27.02.2024.
• Vimalakalagar Sharma V and Others Vs. State of Karnataka in W.P.No.26461/2024 [GM-RES] decided on 27.09.2024.
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822 WP No. 35064 of 2024
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
6. As is clear from the aforesaid judgments of this Court, in the facts of the instant case, in the absence of any material to establish a complaint in writing by a competent officer, as required under Section 195 of Cr.P.C, I am of the considered view that the impugned proceedings for the offence punishable under Section 188 of IPC deserve to be quashed.
7. Insofar as the offence punishable under Section 103 of the KP Act is concerned, as held by this Court in Sri Rajashekharananda Swamiji's case (supra), the offence under Section 188 of IPC is concerned, it is impermissible to split up the other offence alleged against the petitioners. In the instant case, as stated supra, upon quashment of the impugned proceedings in relation to Section 188 of IPC, the other offence under Section 103 of the KP Act not being severable in nature, the same cannot be split up and consequently, the impugned proceedings in relation to Section 103 of the KP Act also deserve to be quashed. -8-
NC: 2025:KHC:4822 WP No. 35064 of 2024
8. Hence, the following:
ORDER a. The petition is hereby allowed.
b. The impugned order dated 10.10.2023 taking cognizance of offences punishable under Section 188 of IPC and Section 103 of the KP Act against the petitioners and the proceedings in C.C.No.27925/2023 on the file of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru qua the petitioners are quashed.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE RB