Karnataka High Court
Arvind vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 July, 2025
Author: V. Srishananda
Bench: V. Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659
CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200386 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. ARVIND S/O VIJAYKUMAR CHAVAN,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: Z.P. MEMBER,
R/O. SANNUR TANDA,
TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI-585102.
2. RAMESH S/O TOPU CHAVAN,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: LINEMAN,
R/O. SANNUR TANDA,
TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI-585102.
Digitally signed
by SUMITRA ...PETITIONERS
SHERIGAR
Location: HIGH
(BY SRI SHIVASHARANA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH UNIVERSITY P.S.,
KALABURAGI-585102,
REPT BY ADDL. SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH-585103
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659
CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025
HC-KAR
2. SUNITA W/O OMKAR RATHOD,
AGE:25 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. SANNUR TANDA,
TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI-585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP, FOR R1;
SRI RAJESH G. DODDAMANI, ADVOCATE, FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528
OF BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 27.01.2025 PASSED IN S.C. NO.155/2023 BY V ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI, BY ALLOWING
THE I.A. FILED UNDER SECTION 319 AND SUMMONING
PETITIONERS FOR MAKING THEM AS ADDITIONAL ACCUSED IN
THE TRIAL PROCEEDINGS.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA)
1. Heard Sri Shivsharan Reddy, learned counsel, for the petitioners, Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned High Court Government Pleader for the first respondent and Sri Rajesh G. Doddamani, learned counsel, for the second respondent/De-facto - complainant. -3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR
2. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with the following prayer:
"a) Quash the impugned order dated 27-01-2025 passed in SC No.155/2023 by V Addl District and Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi by allowing the I.A. filed U/s 319 and summoning petitioners for making them as Additional accused in the trial proceedings in the interest of justice.
b) Pass any other appropriate order or directions as deemed fit by this Hon'ble court under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice."
3. Facts in brief, which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under:
3.1 Upon a complaint lodged by Smt. Sunita W/o Omkar Rathod with University Police Station, Kalaburagi, on 31.10.2019, which was registered in Crime No.168/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 323, 324, 504, 354, 355, 506 read with Section 149 of IPC.-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR 3.2 Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that on 19.09.2019 brother-in-law of the complainant informed her that Neelabai, Arvind, Ramesh Chavan, Subhash Chinna Rathod, Outru Chavan, Kupendra Jadav, Raju Chavan, Bhavnath Rathod, Venkatesh Chavan, Neelakanta Chavan, Umalibai Chinna Rathod have all indulged in harassing Teju over mobile telephone.
3.3 In that regard, the elders of the tanda were informed and there was a panchayat convened on 26.09.2019. The aforesaid persons were called to the panchayat and in front of panchayat they all agreed that they would not further harass Teju.
3.4 When the matter stood thus, on 29.09.2019 at about 9.45 a.m., again Teju approached the complainant and told her that when he and his friends Anil, Arvind and Ravi were sitting near the Hanuman Temple at about 9.30 a.m., Neelabai and Arvind Chavan telephoned to him and Arvind took Teju to Neelabai and Neelabai assaulted Teju -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR with chappals, the same was intimated to the elders. Thereafter, the complainant being the pregnant, intimated the members of her family to take her to the hospital.
3.5 When the complainant was taking to the hospital in a car, the car passed through the house of Ramesh Chavan at about 10.00 a.m., at that juncture, Arvind Chavan, Ramesh Chavan, Chatru, Subhash, Venkatesh, Neelakanta, Raju, Bhadru, Devraj, Bhavnath, Neelabai by Anasubai and Umalibai intercepted the car and picked up the quarrel and pulled the complainant outside the car and kicked on her abdomen. Her husband was assaulted by Ramesh with a club and he sustained blood injuries. Car was also severely damaged.
3.6 Ravi and Sharanu pacified the quarrel and thereafter, the injured persons were taken to the hospital.
3.7 Based on the complaint given by Smt. Sunita, the Police registered the case in Crime No.168/2019 and filed the charge-sheet giving up the present petitioners as -6- NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR accused persons in the said case though their names were found in the FIR.
4. Learned Trial Judge after taking the cognizance, proceeded with the trial. When the complainant was being examined, she has taken out the names of the present petitioners as well and deposed before the Court the individual overt-acts played by the present petitioners as well.
5. Based on such statements, an application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., came to be filed before the Trial Judge seeking the relief of arraigning the present petitioners as additional accused persons.
6. The learned Trial Judge following the principles of law enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors., reported in (2014) 3 SCC 92 issued summons to the present petitioners before actually arraigning them as additional accused persons.
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR
7. The present petitioners did appear before the Trial Judge and filed necessary objections opposing the application relief.
8. Thereafter, learned Trial Judge heard the arguments of both sides and on considering the material on record, allowed the application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.
9. The same is called in question in this petition by the petitioners on the following grounds:
The continuous illegal and indecent acts of Accused No.1 Tejaray under police power and influence by giving sexual harassment to deceased Neelabai in-spite of elders of village advising to him not to continue with such acts against Neelabai had led to mental agony and frustration leading to suicide of said Neelabai the complainant in Crime No.167/2019, that being the real facts the authenticity of allegation in Counterblast complaint filed belatedly filed after 3 days needs to be tested in trial, that order of adding innocent persons as accused persons in proceedings to harass -8- NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR them without analyzing the materials on record deserves to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court.
That as per allegations in complaint and charge-sheet papers, the Complainant was pregnant of 8 months, that due to pain in her stomach she was carried in their car to hospital, but charge-sheet materials is completely silent on any medial record to support such contention, that in absence of any materials the allegations of Complainant she along with her husband traveling in car to go to hospital becomes a unbelievable story, hence when inception of complaint as a counterblast after 3 days with a afterthought story needs strict legal scrutiny, that in absence of any materials the additional accused cannot be added, hence allowing of application U/s 319 by trial court needs to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court.
That even complainant and her husband to support delay in filing a belated complaint after 3 days have contended that after admission in Govt. Hospital police had came to recorded statement of complainant after 2 days, but material on record as per wound certificate demonstrates complainant and her -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR husband got into Govt. Hospital at 11.35 AM and went off from Hospital at 2.50 PM on 29- 10-2019 against the medical advice, that in the absence of any medical records or Doctors opinion offences were alleged against accused persons which cannot be prima-facie made out against them, that being fictitious complaint against the facts on record, the summoning of additional accused without any cogent materials against them is against the settled principles of law and guidelines of Hon'ble Supreme court is erroneous and arbitrary, hence the order of allowing Application U/s319 of Cr.P.C needs to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court.
The Petitioners who are the Father and Brother of Deceased Neelabai who had filed Complaint against A-1(Tejaray) and others in Crime No.167/2019, needs to be protected and safe guarded against the false allegations against them leading to abuse of process of law and court, hence order of making them additional accused by allowing application U/s 319 of Cr.P.C needs to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court.
That contrary to decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court a application U/s 319 needs to be
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR considered only on the cross-examination of witness with materials satisfying additional accused is a necessary party to proceedings, that in the absence of same the trial court has allowed the application U/s 319 only on Examination-in-chief of PW1 to 3, hence order for making petitioners as additional accused needs to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court.
That when statements of complainant and other witness as per charge-sheet that petitioner's and other co-accused not participated in the alleged incident, the change of version of Pw-1 to 3 in their Examination-in-chief needs a corroborative material for adding them as accused, since it violates the constitutional rights of a person, hence greater care and caution needs to be excised, the order of trial court by adding innocent persons as accused is against settled principles of law and same needs to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court. The Accused persons in Crime No.167/2019 to save themselves had filed a counterblast complaint belatedly after 3 days, that due to counterblast complaint allegations is contrary to materials on record, the allegations of PW-
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR 1 to 3 in their examination-in-chief to be tested in legal scrutiny in ross-Examination, hence summoning the closely related persons to deceased complainant to dilute case against them by pressurizing petitioners by adding them as Additional Accused needs to be quashed at the hands of this Hon'ble court. That viewed from any angle the entire the allowing of application U/s 319 of Cr.P.C without any material on record to support such allegations against petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of law and court and to secure ends of justice, same deserves to be quashed.
It is submitted that, the petitioners comes from a respectable family having deep roots in the society and if proceedings are continued against them their image in the society and amongst relatives would be damaged, hence petitioners being totally innocent to allegations made against them without any materials against them, hence they cannot be made to suffer under false and fictitious allegations without cogent evidence.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR
10. Sri Shivsharan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, reiterating the grounds urged in the petition vehemently contended that the procedure followed by the Trial Judge is opposed to the principles of law stated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hardeep Singh referred to supra, which has been subsequently followed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of SMT. ASHA AND OTHERS vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA reported in (2016) SCC Online Kar 9030.
11. He further contended that mere deposing few lines in the examination-in-chief by the complainant when she is examined before the Court would not be sufficient enough to ipso facto arraigning the present petitioners as additional accused, which has resulted in miscarriage of justice and sought for allowing the present petition.
12. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader Sri Jamadar Shahabuddin for the first respondent
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR and learned counsel Sri Rajesh Doddamani for the second respondent support the impugned order.
13. Sri Doddamani would further contend that the present petitioners also involved in the incident and therefore, with specific details, the role assigned to the present petitioners were also narrated in the very complaint itself. Despite the same, Investigating Officer has given up the present petitioners while filing the charge-sheet.
14. Having heard the arguments on both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
15. On such perusal of the material on record, in the charge-sheet no sufficient reasons are shown by the Investigating Officer in dropping the present petitioners as accused persons though they were named in the FIR.
16. Expressing any further opinion on the said aspect of the matter by this Court in this petition would
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3659 CRL.P No. 200386 of 2025 HC-KAR definitely prejudice the rights of the parties in the trial one way or the other.
17. It is settled principles of law and requires no emphasis that at the time of considering the relief under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., Courts are not expected to hold mini trial.
18. Suffice to say that the material now placed on record would be sufficient enough to arraign the present petitioners as additional accused which has been done by the Trial Court in the impugned order, which requires no interference.
19. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER The petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
(V. SRISHANANDA) JUDGE SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41 CT:PK