Allowed¶39

Sri. Lakshmipathi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2025CRL.P/7905/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka HC (S.R. Krishna Kumar J., 18.06.2025) allows Crl.P. 7905/2025 under S.482 Cr.PC / S.528 BNSS and quashes FIR in Crime No.181/2017 and proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 (XLIII ACMM, Bangalore) qua petitioners; case arose from alleged exchange of 500 and 100 notes near Residency Road, Mayohall; offences under Ss.41(D), 102, 420 IPC and S.7 Specified Bank Notes (Cessation Liabilities) Act, 2017; ground: material does not disclose commission of offence; continuation would be abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; impugned proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 on the file of the XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned. ¶39

Sri. Lakshmipathi Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; impugned proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 on the file of the XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the complaint (Annexure 'A'), FIR dated 24.04.2017 in Crime No.181/2017 and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 pending before the learned XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore ought to be quashed. +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

The petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 (referred to in the operative order as arising out of Crime No.181/2023) on the file of the XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, are quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

The material on record comprising the complaint, FIR, charge sheet material, statement of witnesses, documents etc. does not disclose the commission of the alleged offences.

¶34

Key takeaways

Continuation of the impugned proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference of this Court in the present petition.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition under S.482 Cr.P.C. (filed under S.528 BNSS) by two accused seeking quashing of the complaint (Annexure 'A'), FIR dated 24.04.2017 in Crime No.181/2017 (offences punishable under Sections 41(D), 102 and 420 of IPC and Section 7 of the Specified Bank Notes (Cessation Liabilities) Act, 2017) and the entire proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 pending before the XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore. Held: a perusal of the complaint, FIR, charge sheet material, witness statement and documents indicates that they do not disclose the commission of the alleged offences; continuation of the impugned proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference. Petition allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 quashed insofar as the petitioners are concerned. (S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:21196 CRL.P No. 7905 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7905 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. LAKSHMIPATHI SON OF GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.464, 1^ST STAGE, 4^TH BLOCKM 5^TH MAIN, HBR LAYOUT BANGALORE – 560 043

¶9

SRI KANTHARAJA GOWDA SON OF GOPALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.464, 1^ST STAGE, 4^TH BOCK, 5^TH MAIN, HBR LAYOUT BANGALORE – 560 043

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M

¶12

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

(BY SRI. ARUN KUMAR Y. H., ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ASHOK NAGARA POLICE STASTION BANGALORE – 570 048

¶16

…RESPONDENT

¶17

(BY SRI. SOWMYA R., HCGP FOR R1)

¶18

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT (ANNEXURE ‘A’) FIR DATED 24.04.2017 (ANNEXURE ‘B’) FIR IN CR.NO.181/2017 (ANNEXURE ‘C’) TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS WHICH IS

¶19

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:21196 CRL.P No. 7905 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED XLIII ACMM AT BANGALORE.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

In this petition, petitioners seek for the following reliefs:

¶26

“a) Quash the complaint (Annexure – A), FIR dated 24.04.2017 (Annexure ‘B’), FIR in Crime No.181/2017 (Annexure ‘C’), to quash the entire proceedings which is pending on the file of the learned XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bangalore and

¶27

b) Grant such other and further reliefs including the costs of this petition which are just and necessary in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondent and perused the material on record.

¶29

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on

¶30

23.04.2017 for the purpose of exchanging 500 and 100 notes, accused Nos.1 and 2 along with other accused were waiting near

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:21196 CRL.P No. 7905 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Residency Road, Mayohall Court near Nandini Booth Parlour. Respondent based on the information arrived near the said place and took custody of the said accused and registered the case for the offences punishable under Sections 41(D), 102 and 420 of IPC and Section 7 of the Specified Bank Notes (Cessation Liabilities) Act, 2017 in Crime No.181/2017. After investigation, respondent filed charge sheet in C.C.No.59775/2018 before XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall (presently, renumbered as XXIX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petition.

¶34

A perusal of the material on record comprising of the complaint, FIR, charge sheet material, statement of witness, documents and etc., will clearly indicate that the same do not disclose the commission of the alleged offences. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered view that continuation of the impugned proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference of this Court in the present petition.

¶35

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶36

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:21196 CRL.P No. 7905 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i) The petition is hereby allowed .

¶40

ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.59775/2018 arising out of Crime No.181/2023 on the file of XLIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, insofar as the petitioners are concerned are hereby quashed.

¶41

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶42

MDS

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 133

Sri. Lakshmipathi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Lakshmipathi v. 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. H S Devaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Venkatesh R Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Krishnoji Rao Vs the State by Kengeri Police Station

Sri Venkatesh N C Vs State of Karnataka

Sri.Prashanthu K.M Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Murali Krishna S., Vs State of Karnataka