Viresh v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jun 2025CRL.P/200226/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC, Kalaburagi Bench (V. Srishananda, J., 19.06.2025): CRL.P No. 200226 of 2025 — quashing of defamation proceedings under S.499 IPC in C.C. No.2579/2024, Vijayapura, arising from a 06.12.2022 'Punyasmarane' item in Vijayavani Kannada Daily misdescribing petitioner No.1 as son of the late Shankaralingappa Madanshetty; allowed under S.528 BNSS upon affidavit of unconditional apology; proceedings quashed with a direction that the petitioners shall not defame the deceased in any manner.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; proceedings in C.C. No.2579/2024 before the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge, JMFC, Vijayapura quashed; petitioners directed not to defame deceased Shankarlingappa Madashetty in any manner. ¶¶52

Viresh Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶52

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal petition filed under Section 528 BNSS praying for quashing of the proceedings in C.C. No.2579/2024 (offences punishable under Section 499 IPC) against the petitioners ought to be allowed, in view of the memo and affidavit tendering an unequivocal apology by petitioner No.1.

¶¶27

Court's answer

Placing reliance on the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and the second respondent, and the affidavit filed by the petitioners, and exercising the inherent power vested in the Court, the order disposing of the petition was passed.

¶¶48

Ratio / Principle

The criminal petition is allowed.

¶¶52

Key takeaways

The proceedings in C.C. No.2579/2024 pending on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, JMFC, Vijayapura are quashed.ratio¶¶53
The petitioners are directed that henceforth they shall not defame deceased Shankarlingappa Madashetty in any manner.ratio¶¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition (S. 528 BNSS / S. 482 Cr.PC) — Defamation (S. 499 IPC) — Quashing of C.C. No.2579/2024 pending before III Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Vijayapura — Item under heading 'Punyasmarane' published on 06.12.2022 in Vijayavani Kannada Daily described petitioner No.1 as son and his children as grandsons of late Sri Shankaralingappa Doddappa Madanshetty — Petitioner No.1 filed affidavit attributing the error to mistake and oversight and tendering unconditional apology — Counsel for second respondent/complainant sought closure with a specific direction against future defamation of the deceased — Exercising inherent power, petition allowed; proceedings quashed; petitioners directed that henceforth they shall not defame deceased Shankarlingappa Madashetty in any manner.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-K:3247 CRL.P No. 200226 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶5

KALABURAGI BENCH

¶6

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

¶9

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 200226 OF 2025

¶10

(482(Cr.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

VIRESH S/O DANAPPA JOGUR, AGE:47 YEARS,OCC: PVT.

¶13

SMT. SAVITRI W/O VIRESH JOGUR,

¶14

Digitally signed by SUMITRA SHERIGAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

AGE:41 YEARS, OCC: H.H. WORK,

¶16

SMT. BOURAMMA W/O SHANKARALINGAPPA MADANSHETTI, AGE:77 YEARS, OCC: H.H. WORK,

¶17

ALL R/O. H.NO.549, KIRTI NAGAR, IN FRONT OF SAI MANDIR, VIJAYAPURA.

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI M.G. BHRUNGIMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶20

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC-K:3247 CRL.P No. 200226 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

AND:

¶24

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA, KALABURAGI-585103.

¶25

AMARESH S/O REVANSIDAPPA ALAGUNDAGI, AGE:47 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK, R/O. HOUSE NO.50, AKKI COLONY, ASHRAM ROAD, VIJAYAPURA, KARNATAKA 586103.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; SRI S.S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE, FOR R2)

¶27

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF BNSS, 2023, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C. NO.2579/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 499 OF IPC AGAINST THE PETITIONERS, PENDING BEFORE THE 3^RD ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, VIJAYAPURA.

¶28

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

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA

¶30

¶31

NC: 2025:KHC-K:3247 CRL.P No. 200226 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA)

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a

¶36

memo along with an affidavit of the first petitioner.

¶37

The affidavit reads as under:

¶38

“I, Viresh S/o. Dhanappa Jogur, Age: 44 years, Occ: Private work, R/o. Ward No.5 Sy.NO.91 K Plot NO.30 Ashram Road Vijayapur, at Kalaburagi, do hereby solemnly affirms on oath as under:

¶39

I state that I am Petitioner No.1 in the above case, as such I know the facts of the case.

¶40

That on dated 6.12.2022 in Vijayavani News paper by mistake and due to over sight my name is appeared as son and my children name are appeared as grandsons of late Sri. Shankaralingappa Doddappa Madanshetty. For any pain caused to any one I offer my un conditional apology.

¶41

Hence, that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and information.”

¶42

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC-K:3247 CRL.P No. 200226 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

It is submitted by learned counsel for the

¶46

petitioners that in view of the memo filed along with affidavit, the matter can be disposed off as there is an unequivocal apology tendered in respect of the published item in the heading ‘Punyasmarane’ in Vijayavani Kannada Daily Newspaper.

¶47

Learned counsel Sri S.S. Mamadapur appearing for the second respondent/complainant is present and he submits that in view of the affidavit, the petition may be closed with a specific direction to the petitioners that the petitioners shall not in any manner defame the deceased Shankarlingappa Madanashetty.

¶48

Placing submissions by learned counsels for the petitioners and the second respondent, and the affidavit filed by the petitioners, exercising inherent power vested in this Court, the following order is passed:

¶49