Allowed¶70

Shri Narasimhamurthy v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Jul 2025CRL.P/7979/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; resale of IPL match tickets at higher price; Section 318(4) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 (cheating); abuse of process of law; S.482 Cr.P.C. / S.528 BNSS; Cubbon Park Police Station Crime No.59/2025 dated 24.04.2025; XLI Addl. CMM Bengaluru; followed co-ordinate Bench Crl.P.No.7476/2025 (27.05.2025); relied on Mandeep Singh v. State of U.T. Chandigarh, 2015 SCC OnLine P&H 13773; petition allowed, FIR quashed qua accused No.3.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; FIR in Crime No.59/2025 dated 24.04.2025 registered by respondent No.1 - Police for an offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023, pending on the file of XLI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, quashed insofar as the petitioner-accused No.3 is concerned. ¶70

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶70

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.59/2025 dated 24.04.2025 and the proceedings against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023, arising from the alleged resale of IPL match tickets at a higher price, ought to be quashed, their continuation amounting to abuse of process of law.

¶66

Court's answer

Since there is no restriction on reselling IPL match tickets, the petitioner cannot be said to be guilty of the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023.

¶63

Ratio / Principle

Continuation of the impugned proceedings qua the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference in the present petition.

¶66

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal petition under S.482 Cr.P.C. (filed under S.528 BNSS) seeking quashing of FIR dated 24.04.2025 in Crime No.59/2025 of Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru, and proceedings before the XLI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate for offence punishable under S.318(4) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the allegation that the petitioner resold IPL match tickets at a higher price. HELD: There being no restriction on reselling IPL match tickets, the petitioner cannot be said to be guilty of the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023; continuation of the impugned proceedings qua the petitioner (accused No.3) would amount to abuse of process of law. Following the co-ordinate Bench order in Crl.P.No.7476/2025 (disposed of on 27.05.2025), which applied Mandeep Singh v. State of U.T. Chandigarh and Another, 2015 SCC OnLine P&H 13773 (para 15: no legal restriction against reselling match tickets in India). Petition allowed; FIR quashed qua petitioner.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:23743 CRL.P No. 7979 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF JULY, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7979 OF 2025 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SHRI NARASIMHAMURTHY SON OF LATE NARAYANA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.24, 2^ND CROSS, SINGANAPALYA, MAHADEVAPURA, BENGALURU – 560 048.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. GIRIDHAR H, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶12

CUBBON PARK POLICE STATION.

¶13

REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶14

PRABHUSWAMY

¶15

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

¶16

POLICE SUB INSPECTOR

¶17

ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶18

(BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP)

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DATED 24.04.2025, BEARING CRIME NO.59/2025 SUBMITTED BY THE CUBBON PARK POLICE STATION, BENGALURU AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE 41ST ADDL. CMM, BENGALURU COURT IN CRIME NO.59/2025 REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT, FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S. 318(4), BNS.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

NC: 2025:KHC:23743 CRL.P No. 7979 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

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

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following relief:

¶28

“WHEREOF, the petitioner respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash the First Information Report dated 24.04.2025 as Crime No.59/2025 of Cubbon Park Police Station, Bengaluru, submitted before XLL Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, registered by Respondents for the alleged commission of offence punishable under sections 318(4), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, in the interest of justice”.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶30

HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶31

The material on record will indicate that the respondents have instituted the instant proceedings for reselling Indian Premier League (IPL) match tickets against the petitioner for the alleged offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023.

¶32

A perusal of the complaint and FIR will indicate that it is specifically alleged that the petitioner is guilty of reselling IPL match tickets at a higher price thereby being liable to be punished for the aforesaid offence. Under identical circumstances in

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:23743 CRL.P No. 7979 of 2025

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Crl.P.No.7476/2025 disposed of on 27.05.2025, a co-ordinate

¶37

Bench of this Court held as under:

¶38

"1. Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondent-State.

¶39

2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶40

"WHEREFORE, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble may be pleased to:

¶41

i. Quash the F.I.R. initiated by the respondent/Police in FIR No.0215/2025 therein, for the offence punishable under Sec.318(4) of Bharatiya Nagarika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pending before the 41st Addl. C.M.M COURT, Nrupatunga Road, Bengaluru, against the petitioner;"

¶42

3. The FIR in 215/2025 has been registered by the Bellanduru Police Station on the allegation that the petitioner had purchased tickets for the Indian Premier League to be held in the Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bengaluru for a sum of Rs.1200/- per ticket and sold ten of those tickets to certain others at Rs.6,000/- per ticket and on that basis an offence under Section 318(4) the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'the BNS, 2023') is alleged against the petitioner.

¶43

4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had booked the tickets but due to

¶44

¶45

NC: 2025:KHC:23743 CRL.P No. 7979 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

certain unavoidable circumstances could not attend the said match and in that background he sold the tickets, there being no restriction for such sale or resale since the tickets are transferable.

¶48

5. In that regard, he relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in MANDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER reported in 2015 SCC online P&H 13773 on particularly paragraph-15 thereof which is reproduced hereunder:

¶49

" 15 . In India, there is no legal restriction against reselling match tickets. There is a restriction for transfer of some train tickets but not all of them and are nontransferable. It is not the case here that the tickets were fake. It is not the case of the prosecution that the tickets were not transferable."

¶50

6. Relying on Mandeep Singh's case, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there being no restriction on reselling match tickets there cannot be any offence which could be said to be made out under Section 318 of the BNS, 2023. Section 318 of the BNS, 2023 is reproduced herein for easy reference

¶51

"318. Cheating-(1) whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so

¶52

¶53

NC: 2025:KHC:23743 CRL.P No. 7979 of 2025

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to cheat."

¶56

7. This aspect has been considered by the Punjab and Harayana High Court with reference to Section 420 of the IPC in Mandeep Singh's case and the Punjab and Haryana High Court has come to a conclusion that proceedings cannot be allowed to go on as it would be an abuse of process of law.

¶57

8. The very same reasoning of the Punjab and Haryana High Court would be equally applicable to the present case since there is no restriction on the sale of the such tickets.

¶58

9. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶59

ORDER

¶60

i. Criminal petition is allowed.

¶61

ii. The FIR in Crime No.215/2025 registered for offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023 on the file of the 41^st Additional CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bengaluru is hereby quashed."

¶62

As held by this Court in the aforesaid judgment, there

¶63

being no restriction on reselling IPL match tickets, it cannot be said

¶64

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:23743 CRL.P No. 7979 of 2025

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

that the petitioner is guilty of the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that continuation of the impugned proceedings qua the petitioner would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference in the present petition.

¶67

In the result, I pass the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

(i) Petition is hereby allowed.

¶70

(ii) The FIR in Crime No.59/2025 dated 24.04.2025 registered by the 1^st respondent – Police for an offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS, 2023, pending on the file of XLI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, insofar as the petitioner-accused No.3 is concerned is hereby quashed.

¶71

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶72

Srl.

Shri Narasimhamurthy v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Narasimhamurthy 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhu N.S. Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Pankaja Ashok Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Innalli Veeranna @ Vs State by Women Police

Jithendra Kumar Vs State by

Rohan Cariappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Vijaykumar G Vs State of Karnataka