Karnataka High Court
Vijayakumar.N.S vs The State Of Karnataka on 27 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:4414
CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3292 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
1. VIJAYAKUMAR.N.S
S/O N.C. SIDDAPPA GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT NARASANA AGRAHARA
VOKALAGERI, NANJANGUD-571301
2. RAGHAVENDRA @ RAGHU
S/O THIMMAIAH SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/T DEVAARASNAHALLI
NANJANGUD TALUK - 571 301
3. BAGHYARAJU
S/O MARIDEVAACHARI
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT 4598, GOUTHAMA ROAD,
NEELAKANTANAGARA
Digitally signed
by PRASHANTH NANJANGUD - 571 301
NV
Location: High 4. SUNIT @ ASHWIN
Court of
Karnataka S/O GOVINDU K
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 485/1, VOKALAGERI
NANJANGUD - 571 301
5. ANIL KUMAR
S/O BALANAIR
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT BASAVANAGUDI BLOCK
NANJANGUD - 571 301
6. ANANDA B
S/O BALANAIR,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:4414
CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT BASAVANAGUDI BLOCK
NANJANGUD - 571 301
7. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJAU N.S
S/O LATE SRINIVASA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT VOKALAGERE
NANJANGUD - 571 301
8. K.M. MAHESH
S/O L M MALLANNA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT RAMASWAMY LAYOUT
NANJANGUD - 571 301
9. RAJESHWARI
W/O GANESH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/AT NEELKANTA NAGARA
NANJANGUD - 571 301
10. PARAMESHA N
S/O NANJUNDASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT VOKKALAGERE
NANJANGUD - 571 301
11. BHASKAR.R
S/O N. RAMU
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/AT HALLADKERE
NANJANGUD - 571 301
12. RAVI. C
S/O LATE CHANDRU H.
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 1628,
KURUBAGERE
NANJANGUD - 571 301
13. SURESH R
S/O RAMACHANDRA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:4414
CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022
HC-KAR
R/AT N G O COLONY
CHAMALAPURADA HUNDI
NANJANGUD - 571 301
14. CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O SADASHIVA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT HALLADAKERI,
NANJANGUD - 571 301
15. MAHESHA @ MAHADEVA
S/O BOGHSHETTY.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 4438
NEELAKNATANAGARA
NANJANGUD - 571 301
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ARUNA SHYAM M., SR. ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SUYOG HERELE .E., ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH NANJANGUD TOWN P S
REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARANTAKA
BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. ASMA KOUSER, ADD. SPP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER OF TAKING COGNIZANCE DATED 24.06.2015 AND
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.664/2015 ON THE
FILE OF THE LEARNED II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JR.DN, AND
J.M.F.C, NANJANGUD, MYSORE FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE U/S 143,
144, 341, 504 R/W 149 OF IPC INCLUDING THE FIR, COMPLAINT
AND CHARGE SHEET IN CR.NO.190/2013 REGISTERED BY THE
RESPONDENT NANJANGUD TOWN POLICE (PRODUCED AT
DOCUMENT NO.1,2,3 AND 4)
THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:4414
CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
Petitioners being accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 to 15 and 18 in Crime No.190/2013 of Nanjangud Town Police Station pending in CC.No.664/2015 on the file of the learned II Additional Civil Judge Junior Division and JMFC, Nanjangud, Mysore, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 341, 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), are seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against them.
2. Heard Sri. Aruna Shyam M., learned Senior advocate for Sri. Suyog Herele. E, learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Asma Kouser, learned Additional SPP for respondent. Perused the materials on record.
3. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is:
"Whether the petitioners have made out any grounds to allow the petition and to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against them?"
My answer to the above point is in the 'Affirmative' for the following:
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:4414 CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022 HC-KAR REASONS
4. The police officers attached to Nanjangud Town Police Station has filed the first information on 21.09.2013 alleging commission of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 153, 153(a), 188, 295(a), 298, 341, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC. This First Information Report came to be registered against accused Nos.1 to 18 and 40 to 50. The allegation is that the accused have violated the prohibition order under Section 144 of Cr.P.C and committed the offences giving raise to disharmony in the Society between the two communities. The investigation was undertaken and the charge sheet came to be filed for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 341, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC. Even as per column No.17 of the charge sheet, the accused have violated the prohibition order under Section 144 of Cr.P.C and committed the offences.
5. According to learned Senior advocate for the petitioners, if there is violation of prohibition order under Section 144 of Cr.P.C., the offences amounts to Section 188 of IPC. It is specifically alleged that the accused were promoting -6- NC: 2026:KHC:4414 CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022 HC-KAR enmity between two different groups on the grounds of religion. Thus, Section 153-A of IPC is to be invoked while registering First Information Report. Both these Sections are dropped by the Investigating Officer, while filing the charge sheet. Even though, the ingredients of Sections 188 and 153-A of IPC are stated in column No.17, both these Sections are dropped. If Section 188 of IPC is to be invoked, a private complaint is to be filed as there is bar for registration of the police complaint as contained in Section 195(1)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. To invoke Section 153-A of IPC, sanction is must. When the allegations made in the charge sheet at column No.17 squarely refers to commission of the offences under Sections 188 and 153-A of IPC, the informant being the Police Officer should have filed a private complaint as required under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. There is absolutely no reason as to why such a procedure is not followed in the present case.
6. Learned Senior advocate for the petitioners produced the copy of order dated 20.06.2022 in Crl.P.No.2896/2022 to contend that similar complaint was filed against accused Nos.1, 13, 14, 15, 18 and other accused -7- NC: 2026:KHC:4414 CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022 HC-KAR alleging commission of the offences on the same day under Sections 143, 144, 188, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC. As many as sixteen accused in the said case have approached this Court by filing Crl.P.No.2896/2022 and the said petition came to be allowed vide order dated 20.06.2022. This fact is not in dispute. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court referred to the bar contained under Section 195(1)(a) read with Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C which defines the word 'complaint' is to be made in writing to the learned Magistrate and held that the criminal proceedings is liable to be quashed.
7. Learned Senior advocate contends that on similar facts the present complaint was also registered on the same day in the same Police Station making similar allegations only to tease and harass the petitioners.
8. Learned Senior advocate placed reliance on the decision in Sri. Naleen Kumar Kateel V.s The State of Karnataka1, where the Co-ordinate Bench has again referred to the allegation regarding violation of the order passed under Section 144 of Cr.P.C and held that the offence under Section 1 WP.No.25657/2018 DD 20.11.2018 -8- NC: 2026:KHC:4414 CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022 HC-KAR 188 of IPC is squarely attracted, when such allegations are made and the complaint registered by the Police is not in accordance with law.
9. These positions of law are not disputed by the learned Addl.SPP even though, Sections 188 and 153-A of IPC are dropped while filing the charge sheet. It is an ingenious idea of the Investigating Officer to avoid filing of the private complaint after taking sanction. Since the allegations made in column No.17 of the charge sheet squarely attracts Sections 188 and 153-A of IPC, hence, registration of criminal case and continuation of the same will be an abuse of process of law. Hence, I am of the opinion that the criminal case registered against the petitioners is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the 'Affirmative' and proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed.
ii) The criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners - accused Nos.1 to 7, 9 to 15 -9- NC: 2026:KHC:4414 CRL.P No. 3292 of 2022 HC-KAR and 18 herein in CC.No.664/2015 (arising out of Crime No.190/2013 of Nanjangud Town Police Station) for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 341, 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code pending on the file of learned II Additional Civil Judge Junior Division and JMFC, Nanjangud, Mysore, is hereby quashed.
SD/-
(M G UMA) JUDGE PNV CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8