Sri Praveena G v Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.PC. (FILED UNDER SECTION 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH REGISTRATION OF FIR IN CR.NO.8/2025 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT NO.1-BAGALAGUNTE POLICE STATION ON THE COMPLIANT FILED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 SMT.MEGHA N.P. FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 66(E) OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2008 AND SECTIONS 3(5), 318(4), 351(2) AND 352 OF BNS ACT, 2023 WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI ACJM BENGALURU.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

In this petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:

¶31

"(a) Pleased to quash the registration of FIR in Cr No.08/2025 registered by 1^st Respondent Bagalgunte Police station, the Complaint filed by 2^nd Respondent Smt Megha N P for the offences punishable under section 66(E)of Information Technology Act 2008 U/s 3(5), 318(4), 351(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Naya Sanhita Act 2023, which is

¶32

3 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC:19637 CRL.P No. 1797 of 2025

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

pending on the file of xxxi Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate Bengaluru City

¶36

(b) Pleased to grant any other orders or such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the appeal, in the ends of justice."

¶37

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned

¶38

High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. Respondent No.2 having been served with notice of this petition has chosen to remain unrepresented and has not contested the petition.

¶39

A perusal of the material on record would indicate that respondent No.2 claims to be in a relationship with accused No.1-Murali, who since expired on 09.01.2025.

¶40

The petitioners herein, who are arraigned as accused Nos.2 and 3 are brother and mother of the deceased accused No.1-Murali, who is alleged to have had a relationship with de facto complainant, who filed a complaint on 07.01.2025 registered as an FIR in Crime

¶41

4 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:19637 CRL.P No. 1797 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

No.8/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 66E

¶45

of the Information Technology Act, 2008 and Sections

¶46

3(5), 318(4), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023.

¶47

As stated supra , subsequent to filing of complaint, accused No.1 has expired. In this context, it is relevant to state that the perusal of the complaint allegation and FIR would clearly indicate that all the allegations are entirely/ primarily revolving around and made against deceased accused No.1 with whom the de facto complainant is said

¶48

to have had a relationship and no allegations regarding commission of offences have been directed or made as against the petitioners, who are accused Nos.2 and 3 and being the family members, they are unnecessarily dragged into the impugned proceedings and continuation of the

¶49

same would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference of this Court in the present petition, especially when neither FIR nor the complaint disclose the commission of any of the aforesaid offences by the

¶50

5 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:19637 CRL.P No. 1797 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

petitioners herein coupled with the fact that main accused

¶54

No.1 expired subsequent to registration of FIR.

¶55

Under these circumstances, I am of the view that

¶56

the impugned proceedings deserves to be quashed.

¶57

In the result, I pass the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(i) The petition is hereby allowed .

¶60

(ii) The impugned proceedings in FIR in Crime No.8/2025 registered by Bagalagunte Police Station on the file of XXXI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru City, qua the petitioners are hereby quashed.

¶61

Sd/-

¶62

(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶63

LB

¶64

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33

Sri Praveena G v. Vs the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Praveena G v. Vs 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Khana Sharma @ Khana Pandeeth Vs the State of Karnataka

Axis Bank Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

Axis Bank Ltd. Vs the State of Karnataka

C Srinivasulu, Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.Tejaswini Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Sowbhagya Vs State of Karnataka