Allowed¶41

Sri.Y.N.Satyanarayana v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Nov 2025CRL.P/4297/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC; CRL.P No. 4297 of 2022; Crime No. 90/2022, Srinivasapura Police Station, Kolar; Sections 504, 506 IPC; Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act 2015; complaint held to be a reaction/retaliation to disciplinary action initiated against complainant's son; complaint lodged with intention to harass; FIR quashed; II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar; Justice M.I. Arun; oral order dated 17 November 2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of Annexures A and B - the FIR in Crime No.90/2022 of Srinivasapura Police Station, Kolar District, pending on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar; pending interlocutory applications disposed of. ¶41

Sri.Y.N.Satyanarayana Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.90/2022 registered against the petitioner for offences under Sections 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amended Act 2015, pending before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, should be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶26

Court's answer

The complaint against the petitioner has to be construed as a reaction to the disciplinary action initiated by the petitioner against the son of the second respondent.

¶39

Ratio / Principle

The complaint was lodged only with an intention to harass the petitioner.

¶40

Key takeaways

The petition is allowed and the FIR registered in Crime No.90/2022, pending on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, stands quashed.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (single Bench, M.I. Arun, J.) allowed Criminal Petition No. 4297 of 2022 filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and quashed the FIR in Crime No. 90/2022 of Srinivasapura Police Station, Kolar District - for offences punishable under Sections 504 and 506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 - pending on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar. The petitioner, a superior officer of the second respondent's son, had initiated disciplinary proceedings against him and had issued notices recommending action to higher authorities for not working properly. The Court held that the complaint was a reaction to that disciplinary action and had been lodged only with an intention to harass the petitioner, and accordingly quashed the FIR; pending interlocutory applications were disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:47016 CRL.P No. 4297 of 2022

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4297 OF 2022

¶7

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

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. Y.N. SATYANARAYANA S/O CHIKKANARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS

¶10

OCCUPATION: CHIEF OFFICER, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, SRINIVASAPUR KOLAR DISTRICT-563 135

¶11

AND ALSO R/AT:

¶12

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

NANDAGOKULA

¶14

BEHIND SYNDICATE BANK WARD NO.19 RAMAKRISHNA ESTATE SRINIVASAPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 135.

¶15

…PETITIONER

¶16

(BY SRI. R.V. ANAND, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶19

BY SRINIVASAPURA POLICE STATION, KOLAR DISTRICT

¶20

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:47016 CRL.P No. 4297 of 2022

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ATTACHED TO HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU.

¶23

MR. MUNIRAYANNA R S/O LATE RAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT SUGATURU VILLAGE, KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 135.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. VINAY MAHADEVAIAH, HCGP., FOR R.1; SRI K. VISHWANATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R.2.)

¶26

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ANNEXURES-'A' AND 'B', THE FIR IN CRIME NO.90/2022, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 504, 506 OF IPC AND SECTIONS 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) OF SC & ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDED ACT 2015, OF SRINIVASAPURA POLICE STATION, KOLAR DISTRICT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶29

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:47016 CRL.P No. 4297 of 2022

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The petitioner is Chief Officer in the Health Department of the State of Karnataka. The son of the complainant/respondent No.2 is working as a Health Officer in the same Department. The petitioner is a superior officer to the son of the second respondent. It is seen from the records that the petitioner had initiated disciplinary proceedings against the son of the second respondent - complainant. Subsequently, thereafter, the second respondent - complainant lodged a complaint with the first respondent that the petitioner is harassing his son and an FIR has been registered against the petitioner under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

¶34

The case of the petitioner is that the complaint has been lodged because the petitioner initiated action against

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:47016 CRL.P No. 4297 of 2022

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

the son of the second respondent, who was not working properly.

¶38

The records reveal that the petitioner had issued notices and also recommended to the higher authorities to take action against the son of the second respondent - complainant for not working properly.

¶39

Under the circumstances, the complaint against the petitioner has to be construed as a reaction to the disciplinary action initiated by the petitioner against the son of the second respondent.

¶40

It is obvious that a complaint has been lodged only with an intention to harass the petitioner.

¶41

For the aforementioned reasons, the petition is allowed . The FIR registered in Crime No.90/2022 pending on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kolar, stands quashed.

¶42

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:47016 CRL.P No. 4297 of 2022

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45