Allowed¶51

Salman S/O Mahamadrafik Mulla v. the State

Karnataka HC20 Aug 2025CRL.P/100135/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Oral order dated 20-08-2025 by Justice S. Vishwajith Shetty, High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, in CRL.P No. 100135 of 2025, allowing quashing of proceedings under S.283 r/w S.34 IPC (Crime No.26/2021, APMC Yard Police Station, Belagavi; C.C. No.38/2022, IV JMFC Belagavi) against the petitioner/accused No.3, on the ground that ingredients of S.283 IPC are prima facie absent as no public complaint of danger, obstruction or injury arising from the procession was received by the police. No precedents cited; single-author order; no dissents.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition allowed; entire proceedings in C.C. No.38/2022 pending before the JMFC IV Court, Belagavi, arising out of Crime No.26/2021, quashed as against the petitioner (accused No.3). ¶51

Salman S/O Mahamadrafik Mulla Vs the State — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10580 CRL.P No. 100135 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶5

DHARWAD BENCH

¶6

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶9

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100135 OF 2025 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SALMAN S/O MAHAMADRAFIK MULLA, AGE. 31 YEARS, R/O. ASADKHAN SOCIETY, VEERBHADRA NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590 016.

¶12

… PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. A.D. NADAF, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE BY APMC YARD PS, BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT, GOVT. PLEADER, OFFICE AT DHARWAD HIGH COURT, DHARWAD-580 011.

¶16

… RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP)

¶18

Digitally signed (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) by RAKESH S RAKESH HARIHAR S Location: HIGHCOURT OF THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF HARIHAR KARNATAKA

¶19

DHARWAD CR.P.C. (UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS), PRAYING TO QUASH THE BENCH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AGAINST THE PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 IN CRIME NO.26/2021, IN C.C. NO.38/2022 ON THE FILE OF IV^TH JMFC, BELAGAVI, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 283 R/W 34 OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10580 CRL.P No. 100135 of 2025

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶26

The petitioner is before this Court with a prayer

¶27

to quash the entire proceedings in C.C. No.38/2022 pending before the Court of the JMFC IV Court, Belagavi, arising out of Crime No.26/2021 registered by APMC Yard Police Station, Market Sub Division, Belagavi City for the offence punishable under Section 283 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

¶28

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and other accused were peacefully participating in a procession and for extraneous reason, a suo motu case has been registered for the alleged offence. Necessary ingredient for invoking Section 283 of the IPC is not found in the present case. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10580 CRL.P No. 100135 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Per contra , learned HCGP has opposed the

¶33

petition.

¶34

Section 283 of the IPC reads as follows:

¶35

“ 283. Danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation.— Whoever, by doing any act, or by omitting to take order with any property in his possession or under his charge, causes danger, obstruction or injury to any person in any public way or public line of navigation, shall be punished with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees.”

¶36

It is not the case of the prosecution that because

¶37

of the act committed by the accused in the present case, any person had complained to the Police about any danger or obstruction or injuries suffered. A reading of Section 283

¶38

of the IPC makes it very clear that the any person by omitting to take order with any property in his possession or under his charge, causes danger, obstruction or injury to any person in any public way or public line of navigation, shall be punished for the offence under Section 283 of the IPC.

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:10580 CRL.P No. 100135 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

Considering the nature of allegations found

¶42

against the accused, it is very clear that necessary ingredient so as to invoke offence punishable under Section 283 of the IPC is prima facie absent in the present case. Undisputedly, the Police have not received any complaint from the public about having suffered any injuries or obstruction or danger because of the procession in which the accused persons had participated on the alleged day of incident.

¶43

Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion

¶44

that continuation of the impugned criminal proceedings as against the petitioner herein, who is arraigned as accused No.3 in the impugned proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law. Accordingly, the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

(i) The Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶47

(ii) The entire proceedings in C.C. No.38/2022 pending before the Court of the JMFC IV Court, Belagavi, arising out of Crime

¶48

¶49

NC: 2025:KHC-D:10580 CRL.P No. 100135 of 2025

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

No.26/2021 registered by APMC Yard Police Station, Market Sub Division, Belagavi City for the offence punishable under Section 283 read with Section 34 of the IPC stands quashed as against the petitioner herein.

¶52

Sd/-

¶53

(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶54

JUDGE

¶55

VNP / CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 74

Salman S/O Mahamadrafik Mulla v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman S/O Mahamadrafik Mulla v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivamma Gayakwad D/O G Chinna Papa Rao Vs State of Karnataka

G Thulasi Rao S/O Nagoji Rao Gayakwad Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Shrinath S/O Tulasidas Kamat Vs the State of Karnataka

Abdul Rehman S/O Gaffasab Farash Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Ravi N Alias Ravi Vs the State of Karnataka

Siddappa S/O Revaneppa Khoder Vs Durgamma W/O Siddappa Khoder