Shri Santosh S/O Vijay Navale Vs the State of Karnataka

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶2

1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101614 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI SANTOSH S/O. VIJAY NAVALE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶10

SHRI RAVASAB S/O. DAGADU MELALE, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶11

SHRI HEMANT MAYAPPA SHINGE AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶12

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

¶13

SHRI SHASHIKANT S/O. RAJARAM BHOGALE, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶14

SHRI BHIMRAO S/O. MAHADEV MALAGE, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶15

SHRI ANILKUMAR S/O. PRABHAKAR NANDE, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶18

SHRI RAHUL S/O. SAYAPPA KURANE, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶19

SHRI PRAKASH S/O. TUKARAM DONAWADE, AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶20

SHRI VINAYAK S/O. BHOPAL MALAGE, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶21

SHRI SURESH S/O. KALLAPPA MANG, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶22

SHRI SACHIN S/O. SUKUMAR MALAGE, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶23

SHRI MAHEBUB MIRASAB SANDWAD, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE, R/O: PUBLIC WORKS PORTS AND INLAND WATER, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT INDI, DIST: BIJAPUR.

¶24

SMT. MAHADEVI W/O. GANDHAPPA MALAGE, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶25

SHRI BANESHWAR S/O. GANDHAPPA MALAGE, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶28

R/O: AMBEDKAR NAGER, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶29

…PETITIONERS

¶30

(BY SRI SOURABH MIRJE, SRI CHETAN B. PATIL AND SRI AKSHAY R.M., ADVOCATES)

¶31

AND:

¶32

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH SADALGA POLICE STATION, SADALGA, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD - 580 008.

¶33

SHRI MANOHAR S/O. SANGAPPA HEGRE, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: CLAIMS TO BE A SOCIAL WORKER, TAL: CHIKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI - 591 239.

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, AGA FOR R1; SRI ANAND SANDRIMANI AND SRI SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATES FOR R2)

¶36

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., 1973, SEEKING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.146/2022 OF SADALGA POLICE STATION ARISING OUT OF PC NO.342/2022 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKODI AS THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 14 ARE CONCERNED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 34, 120A, 120B, 166, 167, 405, 406, 408, 409, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 471, 426, 420 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. PASS ANY SUCH OTHER ORDER(S) AS THIS COURT MAY DEEM FIT BASED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶37

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

¶38

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶39

4 -

¶40

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶41

ORAL ORDER

¶42

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C by

¶43

accused Nos.1 to 14 praying to quash the entire proceedings in Crime No.146/2022 of Sadalaga Police Station arising out of P.C.No.342/2022 pending on the file

¶44

of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikodi registered for offences punishable under Sections 34, 120A, 120B, 166, 167, 405, 406, 408, 409, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 471, 426, 420 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC” for brevity).

¶45

The respondent No.2 has filed a private complaint against petitioners for aforesaid offences and it came to be registered in P.C.No.342/2022. The learned Magistrate has referred said complaint to C.P.I, Chikodi under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C for investigation. After receipt of said complaint, Crime No.146/2022 has been registered in Sadalaga Police Station for aforesaid offences. Respondent No.2 has alleged in his complaint

¶46

that petitioner Nos.1 to 11 –accused Nos. 1 to 11 have

¶47

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶48

registered “Buddha Ambedkar Abhivuddhi Samithi” and thereafter, applied for proposed plant of the Buddha Vihar Prathna Mandir” to the Assistant Commissions, Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Belagavi in the year 2014-15. In the said complaint the Department has sanctioned Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs only) for the purpose of construction of “Budda Vihar Prathana Mandir”. It is alleged in the complaint that accused Nos.1 to 11 - petitioner Nos.1 to 11 have created false fabricated and forged documents of T.M.C.No.3309/11 standing in the name of “Budda Prathana Mandir”. The estimate of the proposed plan is Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs only) and it is prepared by accused No.12 and they have been submitted to Assistant Commissioner of Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Belagavi and got sanctioned Rs.10,00,000/-/-(Rupees Ten lakhs only). The first installment of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) has been released by the Department. It is alleged that accused Nos.1 to 11 colluding with accused Nos.13 and 14 who are owners of T.M.C No.3309/11 have constructed

¶49

6 -

¶50

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶51

building and that building has been shown as “Buddha Vihar Prathana Mandir”. It is alleged that accused Nos.1

¶52

to 11 have created false, fabricated and bogus photographs of “Budda Vihar Prathana Mandir” and released second installment of Rs.5,00,000/-. Respondent No.2 has filed complaint against petitioners. The learned Magistrate has referred said complaint to Police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C for investigation. The Police registered case against petitioners in Crime No.146/2022 of Sadalaga Police Station. It is sought to be quashed in this present petition.

¶53

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

¶54

Learned counsel for petitioners would contend that “Budda Ambedkar Abhivruddi Samithi” has filed complaint against one Sri Sanjeev S/o Bhimrao Kamble who was President of the Managing Committee alleging that he got release of sanctioned funds without notifying

¶55

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶56

members of the Committee. The said Sri Sanjeev S/o Bhimrao Kamble has challenged said complaint in Criminal Petition No.103688/2022 and it came to be allowed by order dated 12.02.2024 by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court. He submits that similar allegations have been made against petitioners herein and therefore, proceedings against petitioners requires to be quashed. He further submits that there was grudge between petitioners and respondent No.2 as plot sanctioned to him was questioned by petitioners and sanction of plot has been cancelled. Therefore, respondent No.2 has filed false complaint against petitioners. He further submits that in order to refer the complaint to the Police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C, the complainant has to file an affidavit. The said affidavit has not been filed by the complainant and therefore, the order of referring the complaint to the Police is not in accordance with law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Priyanka Srivastava

¶57

8 -

¶58

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶59

and Another Vs State Of U.P and Others¹ . On these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and quash the proceedings against petitioners.

¶60

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that petitioners have created false and fabricated documents and sought for release of funds for construction of “Budda Vihar Prathana Mandir” and committed offences alleged against them. Considering the averments made in the complaint, the learned Magistrate has rightly referred the complaint to Police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. With these, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶61

Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

¶62

perused the impugned order and other materials placed on record.

¶63

Respondent No.2 has filed a private complaint

¶64

against petitioners -accused Nos.1 to 14 and it came to be registered in P.C.No.342/2022 for offences punishable

¶65

under Sections 34, 120A, 120B, 166, 167, 405, 406, 408, 1 Reported in 2015 (6) SCC 287

¶66

9 -

¶67

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶68

409, 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 469, 471, 426, 420 of IPC.

¶69

The learned Magistrate has referred said complaint to

¶70

C.P.I, Chikodi under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C for

¶71

investigation. On perusal of the said order referring the complaint to the Police for investigation, there is no mention of respondent No.2 filing any affidavit. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Priyanka(supra) has held that application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C seeking directions of registering of FIR must be supported by an affidavit. The Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that

¶72

filing of the said affidavit is stated to prevent of abuse of process. In the case on hand, respondent No.2 has not filed any affidavit.

¶73

The “Budda Ambedkar Abhivruddi Samithi” is

¶74

represented by its President –Sri Anilkumar S/o Prabhakar Nande who is petitioner No.6 herein has filed a complaint which came to be registered in P.C.No.396/2022 and same has been referred to the Police for investigation and the case has been registered in Crime No.162/2022 of

¶75

10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶76

Sadalaga Police Station against Sri Sanjeev S/o Bhimrao Kamble, the president of said Samithi wherein petitioner Nos.1 to 11 are Directors. The said Sri Sanjeev S/o Bhimrao Kamble has filed Criminal Petition No.103688/2022 seeking quashing of Crime No.162/2022 of Sadalaga Police Station registered against him for offences punishable under Sections 120A, 120B, 407, 409, 417, 418, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC. The said petition came to be allowed by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 12.02.2022.

¶77

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has

¶78

observed as under

¶79

“ 5. A reading of the complaint would indicate that the petitioner as the President of the committee had sought for release of the said sum of Rupees Ten lakhs and the main allegation is that he had sought for release of funds without notifying the members of the committee and he had on his own, submitted certain documents for the release. Merely because the petitioner as the President, had sought for release of certain funds, assuming without the notice of the other committee members, that by itself would not constitute a crime.

¶80

11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶81

6. It is to be noticed here that, if the petitioner had sought for release of the funds and the Government had in fact released the funds that it had sanctioned, it would have done so obviously after necessary verification. On the basis of the averments made in the complaint, it cannot be said that there was an allegation, which justified the reference to the police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C and for investigation into a crime and therefore, I am of the view that there are no grounds to proceed against the petitioner. The petition is therefore allowed and the proceedings are quashed.”

¶82

Considering the above para No.5, allegations against present petitioners are similar to that of petitioner in Criminal Petition No.103688/2022. If petitioners have sought for release of funds based on some documents and the Government had in fact released the funds that it had sanctioned, it would have done so obviously after necessary verification. On the basis of the averments made in the complaint, it cannot be said that there was an allegation, which justified the reference to the police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C and for investigation into a crime and therefore, I am of the view that there are no grounds to proceed against petitioners.

¶83

12 -

¶84

NC: 2025:KHC-D:4191 CRL.P No. 101614 of 2024

¶85

In the result, the following

¶86

ORDER

¶87

i) The petition is allowed.

¶88

ii) The proceedings against petitioners in Crime No.146/2022 of Sadalaga Police Station arising out of P.C.No.342/2022 pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikodi are quashed so far as petitioner Nos.1 to 14 – accused Nos.1 to 14 are concerned.

¶89

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶90

DSP

¶91

CT-ASC

Shri Santosh S/O Vijay Navale v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Santosh S/O Vijay Navale v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri.Siddesh @ Sagar Irappa Kagatidesai Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri.Siddesh @ Sagar Irappa Kagatidesai Vs the State of Karnataka

Shivakumar S/O Gurupadayya Misi Vs the State of Karnataka

Rakesh S/O Ramanayak Vs the State of Karnataka

Perfect Lasercut and Fab India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vimala Inderchand Jain

State of Karnataka Vs Sri. C. J. Prabhakar