Sri.Panchaksharaiah Ganachari Vs State by

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C. (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED AGAINST THIS PETITIONERS IN CR.NO.0602/2016 REGISTERED BY CHITRADURGA TOWN POLICE STATION AND QUASH THE COGNIZANCE AND ISSUANCE OF PROCESS AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN CC NO.1077/2021 FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 406, 420 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC, WHICH IS NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF 2^ND ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, CHITRADURGA, AS THESE PETITIONERS ARE AT NO FAULT, BY ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL PETITION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Learned Additional SPP is directed to take notice for

¶27

respondent No.1.

¶28

This petition is filed by accused Nos. 1 and 2

¶29

seeking quashing of the proceedings pending in C.C. No.1077/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:33473 CRL.P No. 8436 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

The case of the prosecution is that the

¶33

petitioners, under the guise of providing employment, have collected a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from each candidate. Feeling cheated, a complaint came to be lodged and a crime was registered. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has recorded statements of 35 witnesses. In particular, CWs.8 to 45 have stated before the Investigating Officer that they had each paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the petitioners. On completion of investigation, a charge sheet has been filed, and the matter is now pending before the competent Court.

¶34

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking quashing of the proceedings on the ground that there is no material to indicate that they had collected Rs.2,00,000/- from any candidate by giving a false assurance of employment. It is contended that even if the allegations in the complaint and the charge sheet materials are accepted in their entirety, the same do not

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:33473 CRL.P No. 8436 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

prima facie constitute any offence against the petitioners.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioners would also contend that the alleged transaction pertains to the year 2015, whereas the complaint was lodged only on 27.01.2016, and that there is neither recovery of money nor any incriminating material forthcoming in the charge sheet. On such grounds, it is urged that continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and, therefore, this Court ought to exercise its jurisdiction to quash the same.

¶39

Conversely, learned Additional SPP, drawing

¶40

attention to the charge sheet materials, would contend that there is sufficient material to proceed against the petitioners, and hence, no indulgence is warranted at this stage.

¶41

On a careful examination of the charge sheet materials, it emerges that CWs.8 to 45 have categorically stated before the Investigating Officer that the petitioners

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:33473 CRL.P No. 8436 of 2025

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

induced them with the false assurance of providing employment and, on that representation, collected a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from each of them. The Investigating Officer, on completion of investigation, has filed a charge sheet, and the statements of CWs.8 to 45 form the foundation of the prosecution case. These statements clearly indicate that the witnesses parted with money in the bona fide belief that the petitioners would be able to secure employment for them.

¶45

In the face of such material, the contention of the petitioners that there is no proof of payment of money cannot be accepted at this stage. It is well settled that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., this Court cannot undertake a meticulous appreciation of evidence or embark upon a roving enquiry to test the veracity of witness statements. At the stage of considering

¶46

a petition for quashing, the Court is only required to ascertain whether the allegations in the complaint and the charge sheet, taken at their face value, disclose the

¶47

6 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:33473 CRL.P No. 8436 of 2025

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

commission of an offence. In the present case, the statements of as many as 38 witnesses, including CWs.8 to 45, prima facie support the allegations of cheating and inducement against the petitioners.

¶51

Therefore, it cannot be said that the continuation of proceedings against the petitioners amounts to an abuse of process of law. On the contrary, the charge sheet materials disclose sufficient ground to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶52

Accordingly, this petition filed under Section

¶53

482 of Cr.P.C. does not merit interference and is liable to be dismissed. Hence, the petition stands dismissed.

¶54

Sd/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶55

ALB

¶56

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13

Sri.Panchaksharaiah Ganachari v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.Panchaksharaiah Ganachari v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Nanjaiah Vs State of Karnataka by

S. Muhammed Sagar Vs Ibrahim

Sri Manjunatha N (A1) Vs State by Bidadi Police Station

Sri. Mohammed Altamash Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Santhosh Kumar v Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Umanath Bhandari Vs State of Karnataka