Harsha v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Apr 2025CRL.P/4220/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

quash proclamation; Section 482 Cr.P.C.; Section 528 BNSS; CRL.P No. 4220 of 2025; C.C.No.9412/2012; Sections 419 and 420 IPC; cheating; non-bailable warrant; bail condition to appear as and when summoned; undertaking to appear before Trial Court; conditional quashing; liberty to revive orders; VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Bengaluru; VII Additional CJM Bengaluru; Jalahalli Police Station

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the proclamation dated 17.01.2025 and the impugned orders dated 18.02.2025 and 06.03.2025 passed in C.C.No.9412/2012, conditional upon the petitioners appearing before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing and regularly thereafter; the Trial Court is at liberty to revive the impugned orders if they fail to appear. ¶¶35

Harsha Vs State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the proclamation dated 17.01.2025 issued against the petitioners in C.C.No.9412/2012 (along with the consequential impugned orders) ought to be quashed in view of the petitioners' undertaking to appear before the Trial Court.

¶¶20

Court's answer

In view of the undertaking given by the petitioners, it would be appropriate to quash the impugned proclamation.

¶¶34

Ratio / Principle

The impugned orders dated 17.01.2025, 18.2.2025 and 06.03.2025 passed by the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.9412/2012 are hereby quashed.

¶¶36

Key takeaways

The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing and also regularly as and when summoned; failing which, the Trial Court is at liberty to revive the impugned orders.ratio¶¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition (S.482 Cr.P.C. / S.528 BNSS) allowed. Accused facing trial under Sections 419 and 420 IPC in C.C.No.9412/2012 were enlarged on bail on condition of appearing before the Trial Court as and when summoned; upon non-appearance on 02.12.2024, a non-bailable warrant was issued, followed by a proclamation dated 17.01.2025 (and further orders dated 18.02.2025 and 06.03.2025) by the Magistrate at Bengaluru. The petitioners undertook to appear on the next date of hearing and regularly thereafter, and the undertaking was placed on record. Held: in view of the undertaking, it was appropriate to quash the impugned proclamation and orders; the quashing was made conditional, with liberty to the Trial Court to revive the orders upon any failure to appear. (Hemant Chandangoudar, J.; Oral Order dated 03.04.2025)

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14075 CRL.P No. 4220 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4220 OF 2025

¶7

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

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

HARSHA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O SHIVAKUMAR R/AT NO 109, 4^TH MAIN 4^TH CROSS, MATHIKERE LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 054.

¶10

V. RAGHAVENDRA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O VENKATARAMAIAH, R/AT NO 109, 4^TH MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, MATHIKERE LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 054.

¶11

Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. JEEVAN K., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI, JALAHALLI POLICE STATION

¶16

REPRESENTED BY HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATKA, BENGALURU-560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

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

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14075 CRL.P No. 4220 of 2025

¶20

THIS CRL.P FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 17/01/2025 PASSED IN C.C NO.9412/2012 THEREBY ISSUING PROCLAMATION AS AGAINST PETITIONERS ON THE FILE OF VII ADDITIONAL CJM COURT AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE A.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent-State.

¶25

The petitioners who are facing trial for the offences

¶26

punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of IPC are before this Court seeking relief.

¶27

The petitioners were enlarged on bail subject to certain terms and conditions and one of the condition was that

¶28

they were required to appear before the Trial Court as and when summoned. The petitioners having not appear before the Trial Court on 02.12.2024, the Trial Court issued non-bailable warrant to secure their presence. However, the Trial Court on 17.01.2025 issued a proclamation against the petitioners.

¶29

The petitioners undertake to appear before the Trial

¶30

Court on the next date of hearing and also regularly as and when summoned. The undertaking is placed on record.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC:14075 CRL.P No. 4220 of 2025

¶33

In view of the undertaking given by the petitioners,

¶34

it would be appropriate to quash the impugned proclamation.

¶35

Accordingly, petition is allowed.

¶36

The impugned orders dated 17.01.2025, 18.2.2025 and 06.03.2025 passed by the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in C.C.No.9412/2012 are hereby quashed.

¶37

The petitioners shall appear before the Trial Court

¶38

on the next date of hearing and also regularly as and when summoned. Failing which, the Trial Court is at liberty to revive the impugned orders.

¶39

Sd/(HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE

¶40

AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Harsha v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harsha v. 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

Santhosh Hanumantha Sagar Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Abhinav Lal Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Veena Vs State of Karnataka

Raghav Lal Vs State of Karnataka

Nitish Kashyap Vs State by Mahadevpura P. S.

Basavraj Vs the State of Karnataka