Dismissed¶37

Pradhan Priya Dass v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC4 Aug 2025CRL.P/10182/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (Sachin Shankar Magadum J, 04-08-2025) dismissed CRL.P No. 10182 of 2025 seeking quashing of FIR Crime No.0169/2025 of Sampigehalli P.S., Bengaluru, under Sections 74, 115(2), 352 and 3(5) BNS 2023; allegations of assault on sensitive parts of a woman complainant's body held to warrant investigation; quashing declined as premature owing to case and counter case between the parties; liberty reserved to petitioners to move the Court after charge-sheet.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach this Court at an appropriate stage, if and when a charge-sheet is filed against them. ¶37

Pradhan Priya Dass Vs State of Karnataka by — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioners to approach this Court at an appropriate stage, if and when a charge-sheet is filed against them.

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.0169/2025 and the proceedings arising therefrom are liable to be quashed at the threshold on the ground that the allegations do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences alleged, notwithstanding the existence of a case and counter case between the parties.

¶28

Court's answer

Allegations that the petitioners physically assaulted the woman complainant, with the assault specifically directed towards sensitive parts of her body, on the face of it warrant investigation and cannot be brushed aside merely on the contention that the complaint is false or motivated; the investigating officer is required to conduct a thorough investigation to ascertain the veracity of the allegations.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

In view of there being a case and counter case arising out of the same incident or transaction, with factual aspects yet to be ascertained and both parties having alleged offences against each other, it would be premature to quash the proceedings in Crime No.0169/2025 at the investigation stage.

¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC (filed under Section 528 BNSS) by accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking quashing of FIR in Crime No.0169/2025 registered by Sampigehalli Police Station, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections 74, 115(2), 352 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, pending before the LXXI Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City. Held: (i) allegations that the petitioners physically assaulted the woman complainant, directed towards sensitive parts of her body, warrant investigation and cannot be brushed aside merely on the plea that the complaint is false or motivated; (ii) in view of a case and counter case arising out of the same incident or transaction, it would be premature to quash the proceedings at the investigation stage while factual aspects remain unascertained. Petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Court if and when a charge-sheet is filed.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:30007 CRL.P No. 10182 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10182 OF 2025

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

PRADHAN PRIYA DASS S/O CHITTARANJAN DASS AGED ABOUT44 YEARS

¶9

SHASHIKALA DASS M/O PRADHAN PRIYA DASS AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS

¶10

ELIZABETH RANI M W/O PRADHAN PRIYA DASS AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

¶11

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

ALL ARE R/AT NO. 80, 5TH CROSS MCECHS LAYOUT, DR. SHIVARAMKARANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 077.

¶13

…PETITIONERS

¶14

(BY SRI. JOHN PETER M, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SAMPIGEHALLI P.S. REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:30007 CRL.P No. 10182 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

A. VENILLA

¶21

W/O N. EASWARAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS NO. 10, PHASE 1, MCECHS LAYOUT DR. SHIVARAMKARANTH NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 077.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. RAHUL RAI K, HCGP FOR R1)

¶24

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR NO.0169/2025 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 74, 115(20), 352, 3(5) OF BNS 2023 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT SAMPIGEHALLI P.S. BENGALURU ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED LXXI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU CITY.

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

This petition is filed by accused Nos.1 to 3 seeking

¶28

quashing of the FIR filed in Crime No.0169/2025 for the offences punishable under sections 74, 115(2), 352 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the grounds urged in the petition, submits that the complaint filed by respondent No.2, who is a

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:30007 CRL.P No. 10182 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

neighbour, is false and has been lodged solely with an intent to harass the petitioners. It is further contended that the allegations made in the FIR do not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences alleged, and therefore, the proceedings are liable to be quashed at the threshold.

¶33

Upon perusal of the complaint and the nature of allegations made therein, this Court notes that the petitioners are alleged to have physically assaulted the complainant, who is a woman. It is specifically alleged that the assault was directed towards sensitive parts of the complainant’s body. These allegations, on the face of it, warrant investigation and cannot be brushed aside merely on the contention that the complaint is false or motivated. At this stage, the investigating officer is required to conduct a thorough investigation into the complaint to ascertain the veracity of the allegations.

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:30007 CRL.P No. 10182 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioners has also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioners have lodged a counter complaint against respondent No.2, which has also culminated in the registration of a separate crime. In view of there being a case and counter case arising out of the same incident or transaction, this Court is of the considered view that it would be premature to quash the proceedings in Crime No.0169/2025 at the investigation stage, particularly when factual aspects are yet to be ascertained and both parties have alleged offences against each other.

¶37

Reserving liberty to the petitioners to approach this Court at an appropriate stage, if and when a charge-sheet is filed against them, the present petition stands dismissed.

¶38

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶39

HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7 CT: BHK

Pradhan Priya Dass v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradhan Priya Dass v. State of Karnataka by

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

Mr. Parvath. P. a. Vs the State by Ponnampet Police Station

Dr.M.C Mahesh Kumar Vs Dr.M. Sharada

Kantharaj Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Suvarnamma Vs Smt. Parvathamma

Sri Ganesha K Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjappa T Vs State by Police Inspector