Allowed¶42

Sadananda Shetty v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Dec 2025CRL.P/1182/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (Mohammad Nawaz, J.), CRL.P No. 1182 of 2025, decided 11.12.2025. Criminal petition under S. 482 CrPC / S. 528 BNSS seeking quashing of cognizance and proceedings in C.C. No.1235/2024 (Crime No. 05/2018, Udupi Town Police Station) for offences under S. 78(i)(iii) Karnataka Police Act (matka/jugari). Key points: evidentiary value of a co-accused's confessional statement; implication of an accused solely on such confession; abuse of process of law; quashing of proceedings. Result: petition allowed; proceedings against accused No.2 quashed.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings in C.C.No.1235/2024 pending on the file of I Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. at Udupi quashed, in so far as petitioner/accused No.2 is concerned. ¶42

Sadananda Shetty Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:52729 CRL.P No. 1182 of 2025

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1182 OF 2025

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SADANANDA SHETTY S/O SANJEEVA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT NEHRU MAIDAN, ALEVOOR POST UDUPI TALUK-576 115. PERMANENT RESIDENT OF ANEMAKKI, GEDDODU, KATTINAJADDU, SIDDAPURA VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576 229.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. HALEEMA AMEEN, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

STATE OF KARNATAKA UDUPI TOWN POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. ANOOP KUMAR M.V., HCGP)

¶17

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER TAKING COGNIZANCE IN CC NO 1235/2024 DATED 15.03.2018 PENDING ON FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC UDUPI, REGISTERED BY UDUPI TOWN POLICE ON

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:52729 CRL.P No. 1182 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

26.08.2017, IN CRIME NO.05/2018, FOR OFFENCES P/U/S 78(i) (iii) OF KP ACT.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to accept notice for the respondent-State.

¶26

Heard both sides and perused the material placed on record.

¶27

The petitioner is seeking to set aside the order taking cognizance and the consequential proceedings pending in C.C. No.1235/2024, on the file of the learned 1^st Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. at Udupi.

¶28

The FIR is registered on a su-moto complaint lodged by the DCIB Office against accused nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under section 78(i)(iii) of

¶29

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:52729 CRL.P No. 1182 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Karnataka Police Act. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in the FIR.

¶32

It is the case of prosecution that on 12/01/2018 at about 2:20 p.m., the complainant received a credible information that accused no.1 by name Sanjeeva Devadiga is indulged in collecting money from the public and playing matka/jugari near the city bus stand, Udupi. As such, he went to the spot along with other police officials and apprehended the said accused. The public who were playing Matka ran away on seeing the Police. From accused No.1, a cash of Rs.2,180/-, a chit and a ball pen were seized under a mahazar.

¶33

The petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.2 in the FIR only on the basis of the statement alleged

¶34

to have given by accused no.1. According to the prosecution, accused no.1 confessed that he was giving the money collected from the public to the petitioner/ accused no.2 .

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:52729 CRL.P No. 1182 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Except the confessional statement of accused

¶38

no.1 there is no other material whatsoever even minutely indicating the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged

¶39

offence. The confessional statement of co-accused is not a substantial evidence to implicate a person as an accused. Hence, the proceedings against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law which is liable to be quashed.

¶40

Accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

i) The criminal petition is allowed.

¶43

ii) Entire proceedings in C.C.No.1235/2024

¶44

pending on the file of I Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. at Udupi, in so far petitioner/accused No.2 is concerned are hereby quashed.

¶45

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE