Rahul B J @ Dhoni Vs State by

BHARATH KUMAR M., S/O. MANJUNATH M., AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.17/9, 1^ST MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, BEHIND HP SOFTWARE COMPANY, WHITEFIELD ROAD, B NARAYANAPURA, BANGALORE – 560 016.

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

SHYAM KUMAR N., S/O NATARAJ, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 87/2,

¶15

NANJAPPA LANE, WHITEFIELD ROAD, B NARAYANAPURA,

¶16

BANGALORE – 560 016.

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY SRI. AMEENULLA N. K., ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

STATE BY MAHADEVPURA P S REP BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING,

¶21

BANGALORE – 560 001

¶22

2 -

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC:20989 CRL.P No. 7676 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

MR. SATISH R S/O RAGHU, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 76/1, NAGARAJ BUILDING, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, OPP. TO SUGUMA CHICKEN, NEAR RAMA TEMPLE, B. NARAYANPURA, BANGALORE – 562 135

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. VINOD REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶28

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND COMPLAINT AND PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.NO.1184/2024 FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC, AGAINST RAHUL B.J. AND OTHERS PENDLING ON THE FILE OF 29^TH ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYOHALL AT BANGALORE ON TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT.

¶29

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

¶30

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

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following relief:-

¶33

“The petitioner’s most respectfully prays to this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the FIR, and complaint & proceedings in S.C.No.1184/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC against Rahul B J and others pending on the file of 29^th Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, at Bengaluru on terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶34

3 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:20989 CRL.P No. 7676 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioners – accused Nos.1 to 3 and learned counsel for 2^nd respondent – complainant have filed a Joint Affidavit duly signed by the petitioner, 2^nd respondent and their respective counsel and the same is taken on record.

¶38

Petitioners – accused Nos.1 to 3, respondent No.2 and their counsel are physically present before the Court and they admit the contents of the Joint Affidavit, which reads as under:-

¶39

“ JOINT AFFIDAVIT

¶40

1. We, Rahul B J@ Dhoni, S/o Jagadish BT, Aged about 34 Years, Residing at 94/3, 1st Cross, 3rd main, B Narayanapura, Bangalore-560016. Petitioner no.1

¶41

2. Bharath Kumar M, S/o Manjunath M, Aged about 29 Years, Residing at #17/9, 1st Main, 4th Cross, Behind HP Software Company, Whitefield Road, B Narayanapura, Bangalore 560016. Petitioner no.2

¶42

3. Shyam Kumar N, S/o Nataraj, Aged about 30 Years, Residing at #87/2, Nanjappa Lane, Whitefield Road, B Narayanapura, Bangalore560016. Petitioner no.3

¶43

4. Mr. Satish R, S/o Raghu, Aged about 23 Years, Residing at No. 76/1, Nagaraj Building, 1st Main Road, Opp to suguma Chicken, Near Rama Temple, B Narayanpura, Bangalore -562135. Respondent No.2 herein.

¶44

4 -

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:20989 CRL.P No. 7676 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

5. We state that, we are the Petitioners and Respondent No.2 in the above case and we know the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, we are swearing to this Affidavit.

¶48

6. We state that, the Criminal case has been filed by Respondent No.2 in Cr.No.136/2024 now SC.No.1184/2024 for the offences punishable U/s 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC, against Rahul B J and others pending on the file of 29th Addl City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayohall, at Bangalore.

¶49

7. We submit that, the dispute which took place between us have been settled by the well-wishers, Elderly members and family members and now we have amicably settled the dispute and to put an end to this litigation we have approached this Hon'ble Court for the quashing of the proceedings.

¶50

8. The settlement has been taken place between private parties and has no impact against the public at large, hence this Hon'ble Court be pleased to interfere and quash the proceedings filed against the Petitioners.

¶51

9. We submit that, the continuation of the cases against the Petitioners is nothing but abuse process of law and hence this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C/ 528 of BNSS.

¶52

It is submitted that with the intervention of the elderly members the petitioners and the complainant have settled

¶53

5 -

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:20989 CRL.P No. 7676 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

this matter themselves. And as per the Judgement of Gian Sing V/s State of Punjab it is between the private parties they have resolved the issue by themselves and has settled the matter.

¶57

Wherefore, we humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the proceedings in Cr.No. 136/2024 now SC.No.1184/2024 for the offences punishable U/s 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 R/w 34 of IPC, against Rahul B J and others pending on the file of 29th Addl City Civil & Sessions Judge, Mayohall, at Bangalore in the interest of justice and equity.

¶58

We, the Deponents, herein to declare that this is our names and signatures and the contents of this affidavit, stated above, are true and correct to the best of our knowledge, information and belief.”

¶59

In view of the aforesaid settlement entered into

¶60

between the petitioners and 2^nd respondent, I pass the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

(i) The petition is disposed of in terms of Joint

¶63

Affidavit dated 16.06.2025.

¶64

(ii) The proceedings in S.C.No.1184/2024 (arising

¶65

out of Crime No.136/2024 of 1^st respondent – Police) registered for the offences punishable

¶66

6 -

¶67

NC: 2025:KHC:20989 CRL.P No. 7676 of 2025

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of 29^th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayohall, Bengaluru, insofar as the petitioners

¶70

are concerned are hereby quashed.

¶71

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶72

MDS

¶73

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 83

Rahul B J @ Dhoni v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul B J @ Dhoni v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Ramesh Chander Somani Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Karthikesh N C Vs Sri Lingaiah Setty B v

Shakil Ansari Sarkar @ Sarkar Vs State of Karnataka

Sri J M Mahadeva Vs the State of Karnataka

Changanlal Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Senthil Sangay Raj, Vs State of Karnataka