Dismissed¶46

Shri. Pampanagouda S/O Shivanagouda Patil v. the State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC4 Apr 2025CRL.P/101457/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (Dharwad Bench) | CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024 | 04.04.2025 | Shivashankar Amaranannavar J | S.482 CrPC quashal petition by 4 accused in C.C.No.367/2024 (order body: C.C. No.367/2020) arising from Navalagund PS Crime 175/2023, offences Ss.323/341/504/506 r/w S.34 IPC — DISMISSED; pending civil dispute (RFA 100369/2020) and wound-certificate anomalies held no ground for quashal; charge-sheet eyewitness corroboration (C.W.4, C.W.6); matter left to trial.

What did the court decide?

Mere pendency of a civil dispute between the parties is no ground to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused for the alleged offences. ¶44

Shri. Pampanagouda S/O Shivanagouda Patil Vs the State of Karnataka by — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners (arrayed as accused Nos. 1 to 4) before the Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Navalagund in C.C.No.367/2024, arising out of Navalagund P.S. Crime No.175/2023, for offences under Sections 323, 341, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC, ought to be quashed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. +3 more

¶20

Court's answer

On perusal of the charge sheet materials, C.W.4 is an eye witness to the incident which took place at 3.00 p.m. on 12.10.2023 — i.e., the charge sheet materials indicate that the incident took place.

¶42

Ratio / Principle

Mere pendency of a civil dispute between the parties is no ground to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused for the alleged offences.

¶44

Key takeaways

Recording of no external injury in the wound certificate does not establish that the complainant sustained no injury; that question is a matter of trial and will be revealed in the evidence of the Doctor who examined the complainant.ratio¶44
C.W.4's statement corroborates the accusation in clause No.17 of the charge sheet, and C.W.6 is another eye witness to the incident which took place at 5.00 p.m. on 12.10.2023 in front of the Tahsildar office near the gate.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

S.482 Cr.P.C. quashal petition by accused Nos. 1–4 (including an advocate and a student) directed against the entire proceedings in C.C.No.367/2024 (cause title; the order body records the case as C.C. No.367/2020), arising out of Navalagund P.S. Crime No.175/2023, for offences under Ss.323, 341, 504, 506 read with S.34 IPC, pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalagund. Held (perusal of charge-sheet records): (i) the charge sheet materials indicate the 12.10.2023 incidents took place — C.W.4 is an eye witness to the 3.00 p.m. incident and his statement corroborates the accusation in cl.No.17; C.W.6 witnessed the 5.00 p.m. incident near the Tahsildar office gate; (ii) the wound certificate's entry of no external injury does not mean no injury was sustained — that is a matter of trial, to be revealed in the Doctor's evidence; (iii) mere pendency of a civil dispute between the parties (partition dispute; RFA No.100369/2020 before this Court) is no ground to quash criminal proceedings. Defence pleas of a two-day delay in filing the complaint and of a false complaint rejected. Petition dismissed. — Shivashankar Amaranannavar, J. (High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench), 04.04.2025.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF APRIL 2025

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.101457 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SHRI. PAMPANAGOUDA S/O. SHIVANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE, R/O: GOUDAR ONI, NAVALAGUND, DISTRICT: DHARWAD, PIN: 582 208.

¶8

SHRI. CHANNANAGOUDA S/O. SHIVANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT, R/O: GOUDAR ONI, NAVALAGUND, DISTRICT: DHARWAD, PIN: 582 208.

¶9

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad

¶10

SHRI. MALLIKARJUN S/O. SHIVAPPA YADALLI, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O: AMMINABHAVI, TQ AND DIST: DHARWAD, PIN - 580 201.

¶11

SHRI. RAMESHGOUDA S/O. CHANNABASANGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O: HIREGUNJAL, TQ: KUNDAGOL, DIST: DHARWAD, PIN – 581 117.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI T. R. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶14

¶15

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS POLICE INSPECTOR OF NAVALAGUND P. S., REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, DHARWAD, PIN – 580 011.

¶18

SHRI. MALLANAGOUDA S/O. PAMPANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GOUDRA ONI, NAVALGUND, TQ: NAVALGUND, DIST: DHARWAD, PIN – 582 208.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; SRI G.I.GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶20

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS PENDING ON FILE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, NAVALAGUND IN C.C.NO.367/2024 (ARISING OUT OF NAVALAGUND P.S. CRIME NO.175/2023) FILED AGAINST THESE PETITIONERS FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 323, 341, 504 AND 506 READ WITH SECTION 34 OF I.P.C. INSOFOR THESE PETITIONERS HEREIN/ARRAYED AS ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 4, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶23

¶24

NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

This petition is filed by petitioners -accused Nos.1 to 4 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No.367/2024 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalagund registered for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ”IPC” for brevity).

¶27

The respondent No.2 has filed a complaint and it came to be registered in Crime No. 175/2023 of Navalgund Police Station. The Police after investigation have filed charge sheet against petitioners -accused Nos.1 to 4 for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. On the basis of the said charge sheet, a case came to be registered against petitioners in C.C. No.367/2020 and it is pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Navalagund. The proceedings of the said case are sought to be quashed in this petition.

¶28

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶29

Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned

¶30

counsel for respondent No.2 and learned AGA for respondent No.1 –State.

¶31

Learned counsel for petitioners –accused Nos.1 to 4 would contend that there is civil dispute pending between parties in RFA No.100369/2020 before this Court. As there is civil dispute pending, a false complaint has been filed against petitioners –accused Nos.1 to 4 and there is delay of two days in filing the complaint. In the wound certificate the injured has been examined at 11.30 a.m. on 12.10.2023 and as per averments of the complaint the incident has taken place at 3.00 p.m. on 12.10.2023. In the said wound certificate it is noted that

¶32

no external injuries but even it is mentioned that simple injury. C.W.4 and 5 are eye witnesses to the incident and

¶33

they are respondent Nos.10 and 11 in the said RFA which

¶34

is pending before this Court. He further submits that further statement of the complaint indicate that some of the alleged facts contained in the complaint are not taken

¶35

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶36

place which itself indicate that a false complaint has been filed against petitioners. He submits that accused No.1 is advocate and accused No.2 is student. On these grounds, he prays to allow the petition and quash the proceedings against petitioners.

¶37

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that even though there is civil dispute pending between parties before this Court but on perusal of the charge sheet materials it indicate that incident has taken place. C.W.4 is eye witness to the incident and he has stated overtacts of each of petitioners. The Doctor need to be examined to ascertain extract date and time of he examining the injured and what are simple injuries which have been sustained by the injured. Considering the charge sheet materials petitioners have to face trial. With these, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶38

Learned AGA for respondent No.1-State has reiterated grounds urged by learned counsel for respondent No.2 and prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶39

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶40

Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

¶41

perused charge sheets records.

¶42

The accusation in the charge sheet against petitioners is that complainant and accused are relatives by blood and there was dispute regarding partition of properties. That on 12.10.2023 at about 3.00 p.m. the complainant and C.W.4 went to the lands so as to sees whether there was rain or not. At that time, accused No.1 abused them in filthy words and gave threat to finish them. At that time, accused No.1 and 2 abused them and assaulted the complainant with hands on his back and head and restrained him. Accused Nos.3 and 4 abused the complainant and his brother in filthy language and gave life threat. On the same day i.e. 12.10.2023 at about 5.00p.m. accused Nos.1 and 3 have abused C.W.6 in front of Tahsildar Office near the gate. On perusal of the charge sheet materials C.W.4 is one of the eye witness to the incident which has taken place at 3.00 p.m. on 12.10.2023. On perusal of his statement it is corroborates

¶43

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6057 CRL.P No. 101457 of 2024

¶44

with accusation in cl.No.17 of the charge sheet. C.W.6 is another eye witness to the incident which has taken place at 5.00 p.m. on 12.10.2023 in front of Tahsildar office near gate. The wound certificate of complainant indicates that he has not sustained any external injuries but Doctor has opined that he has sustained simple injuries. Merely because the complaiant has not sustained any external injury at this state it cannot be said he has not sustained injury, since it is matter of trial and it will reveal in the evidence of Doctor who has examined the complainant. Merely because civil dispute is pending, proceedings against petitioners for alleged offences cannot be quashed.

¶45

Petitioners have not made out any grounds for

¶46

quashing the proceedings as sought for. In the result, the petition is dismissed.

¶47

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶48

DSP/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Shri. Pampanagouda S/O Shivanagouda Patil v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Pampanagouda S/O Shivanagouda Patil v. the State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hanumanth S/O Siddappa Malladad Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Bapu Fakrusab Shekh Vs the State of Karnataka

Kumar Aliyas Kumya Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Maruti S/O Tippeshappa Lingader Vs the State of Karnataka

Siddesha M S/O Nagappa M Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohammad Ibrath S/O. Abdul Sayyed Shaikh Vs the State of Karnataka