Karnataka High Court
Sharuk S/O. Gulabsab Pendari vs The State Of Karnataka on 24 November, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16265
CRL.P No. 100527 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100527 OF 2025
(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))
BETWEEN:
1. SHARUK S/O. GULABSAB PENDARI
AGE. 24 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR,
R/O. HARUGERI GANPATI GALLI,
TQ. RAYABAGA, DIST. BELAGAVI-591317.
2. SHABAJALI S/O. AHAMMED JAMADAR
AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR,
R/O. HARUGERI GANPATI GALLI,
TQ. RAYABAGA, DIST. BELAGAVI-591317.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. RAJA RAGHAVENDRA NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH NAVANAGAR P.S.,
R/BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
Digitally signed by DHARWAD BENCH, DHARWAD-580011.
RAKESH S
HARIHAR ...RESPONDENT
Location: High
Court of Karnataka, (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SE. 482 OF CR.P.C. (U/S.
528 OF BNSS, 2023) SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS
IN CC NO.47/2022 WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, BAGALKOTE (NAVANAGAR PS CRIME NO.
118/2020) WHICH IS REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/SEC.
120(B) AND 420 O IPC IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.
13 AND 14 ARE CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16265
CRL.P No. 100527 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) Heard Sri. Raja Raghavendra Naik, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Girija S. Hiremath, the learned HCGP for respondent.
2. The petitioners are accused Nos.13 and 14. Qua the other accused, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had quashed the proceedings. The same reads as follows:
"1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C. No.47/2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 120(B) & 420 of the IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel Shri J.Basavaraj appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGp Shri V.S. Kalasurmath appearing for the respondent - State. 7
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submits that qua accused Nos.10 & 17, this Court has already quashed the proceedings. He would further submit that the proceedings are quashed against the agent and the alleged kingpin, the petitioner being a -3- NC: 2025:KHC-D:16265 CRL.P No. 100527 of 2025 HC-KAR student cannot be continue in the web of crime in further. In the light of the quashment of the proceedings, he would seek the same relief that is granted by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P. No.103778/2022, disposed off on 28th November 2022.
4. The Co-ordinate Bench held as follows:
"The FIR was registered against the petitioner/accused No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 120 and 420 IPC alleging that the accused No.1 on 22.11.2020 by using electronic device, was writing answer in the constable examination and at that point of time, invigilator noticing the same apprehended him and seizes the electronic device. Thereafter the Police conducted an investigation and submitted charge sheet against the petitioner/accused No. 17 and others for the offences punishable under Sections 120 and 420 of IPC. Learned Magistrate after accepting the charge sheet took the aforesaid offences and issued summons. Taking exception to the same, petitioner/accused No. 17 before this ourt.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondent-State.
3. Police during the course of investigation, apprehended the accused Nos.2 and 3 who had allegedly supplied electronic device to the accused No.1 and during intogoration, accused Nos.2 and 3 have stated that similar electronic devices have been supplied to accused No.17 and others and only on the basis of statement of accused Nos.2 and 3, the petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.17.
4. Section 114 of illustration (b) of the Evidence Act, specifies that statement of an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborate by the materials particulars. In the instant case, there is no recovery made -4- NC: 2025:KHC-D:16265 CRL.P No. 100527 of 2025 HC-KAR from the accused No.17 to substantiate the allegation that he used electronic device to answer in the Police constable examination and charge sheet is filed on the basis of statement of accused Nos. 2 and 3 which is impermissible in view of Section 114 illustration (b) of Evidence Act. Hence, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the accused No.17 in the absence of corroborative material will be an abuse of process of law. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned proceedings C.C.No.47/20222 pending on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, and CJM BAgalkote, insofar as it relates to petitioner/accused No. 17 is hereby quashed."
5. In the light of the issue standing answered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, further proceedings would become an abuse of process of law.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
(i) The petition is allowed.
(ii) The proceedings qua petitioner stands quashed."
3. The learned HCGP would not dispute the position and accept the fact that qua the other accused, the proceedings are quashed.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16265 CRL.P No. 100527 of 2025 HC-KAR
4. In that light, the petition deserves to succeed. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER i. The Criminal Petition is allowed. ii. The proceedings in C.C. No.47/2022 pending on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bagalkote, qua the petitioners, is quashed.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Rsh / CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 272