Allowed¶41

Country Club (India) Limited v. Sri Nallappa

Karnataka HC29 Oct 2025CRL.P/9456/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compounding of Section 420 IPC offence through joint application under Section 320 read with 482 Cr.P.C; quashing of criminal proceedings (CC.No.56903/2016, ex-Crime No.165/2011, Indiranagar Police) after private settlement of a club-membership dispute; settlement effected before District Consumer Redressal Commission, Bengaluru (CC.No.1855/2011) for Rs.3,00,000; Country Club (India) Ltd v. Nallappa; Karnataka High Court, 2025; Section 528 BNNS noted in caption.

What did the court decide?

Permission to compound the offence granted; the entire proceedings in CC.No.56903/2016 pending on the file of the Court of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall at Bangalore, registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC, are quashed; I.A.No.1/2025 is allowed. ¶41

Country Club (India) Limited Vs Sri Nallappa — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings in CC.No.56903/2016 (offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC) pending before the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bangalore, may be quashed in view of the settlement between the parties and the joint application under Section 320 read with 482 of Cr.P.C seeking permission to compound the offence.

¶24

Court's answer

The dispute between the parties is purely private in nature, having arisen out of the membership of the respondent in the petitioner's club.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

In view of the settlement between the parties, no purpose will be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending; hence, in the interest of justice, it is necessary to allow the application seeking permission to compound the offence.

¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru), single-judge bench (Justice Mohammad Nawaz), CRL.P No. 9456 of 2024, decided 29-10-2025. Petition filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C (caption additionally noting u/s 528 BNNS) by Country Club (India) Limited (renamed 27-11-2014 as Country Club Hospitality and Holidays Limited) to quash the entire proceedings in CC.No.56903/2016 (Crime No.165/2011, Indiranagar Police), pending before the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bangalore, for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC. A joint application under Section 320 read with 482 of Cr.P.C, signed by the petitioner and the respondent/de-facto complainant and their counsel, sought permission to compound the offence, the parties having amicably resolved all pending disputes before the District Consumer Redressal Commission at Bengaluru in CC.No.1855/2011, with the petitioner agreeing to pay Rs.3,00,000 as full and final settlement (Rs.1,00,000 already paid; balance Rs.2,00,000 payable on or before 30.11.2025). Held: the dispute is purely private in nature, arising out of the respondent's membership in the petitioner's club; in view of the settlement, no purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending, and in the interest of justice the compounding application was allowed. Order: petition allowed; entire proceedings in CC.No.56903/2016 quashed; I.A.No.1/2025 allowed.

¶1

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:43106 CRL.P No. 9456 of 2024

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9456 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

COUNTRY CLUB (INDIA) LIMITED (RENAMED ON 27-11-2014 AS COUNTRY CLUB HOSPITALITY AND HOLIDAYS LIMITED) OFFICE AT NO.478, 1^ST MAIN 1^ST STAGE, 100 FEET ROAD INDIRANAGARA BENGALURU - 560 038 REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED PERSON MR. VASEEM ULLAH QURESHI.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. LOKESHA A.C., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHRIDHARA K., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by LAKSHMI T Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. NALLAPPA S/O LATE VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO.72, P AND T COLONY CHOLARA PALYA, MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. SAMPATH KIRAN CHARLES SALDANHA, ADVOCATE)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:43106 CRL.P No. 9456 of 2024

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 (FILED U/S.528 BNNS) CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE RESPONDENT IN C.C.NO. 56903/2016 (CRIME NO.165/2011) OF INDIRANAGARA POLICE, PENDING ON THE FILE OF X ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYOHALL AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 420 OF IPC.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Petitioner is seeking to quash the entire proceedings initiated by the respondent in CC.No.56903/2016, pending on the file of the Court of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall at Bangalore, for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC.

¶25

An application under Section 320 read with 482

¶26

of Cr.P.C is filed, signed by the petitioner as well as respondent/de-facto complainant and their respective learned counsel.

¶27

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:43106 CRL.P No. 9456 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

It is stated that during the pendency of the

¶31

case, the parties have amicably resolved all the pending disputes, before the District Consumer Redressal Commission at Bengaluru in CC.No.1855/2011, wherein the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/(Rupees Three Lakhs only) to the respondent as full and final settlement. It is also stated that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) is already paid and the petitioner has agreed to pay the balance sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) to the respondent on or before 30.11.2025.

¶32

The dispute is purely private in nature, which arose out of the membership of the respondent in the petitioner's club. Petitioner as well as respondent are present before the Court. They have submitted that the matter has been settled. Respondent submits that in view of the settlement he will not precipitate the matter any further and he has no objection to quash the proceedings.

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:43106 CRL.P No. 9456 of 2024

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

5. In view of the settlement between the parties,

¶37

no purpose will be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. Hence, in the interest of justice, it is necessary to allow the application seeking permission to compound the offence. Accordingly, the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

i. Petition is allowed .

¶40

ii. The entire proceedings in CC.No.56903/2016

¶41

pending on the file of the Court of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall at Bangalore, registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC are quashed.

¶42

iii. I.A.No.1/2025 is allowed .

¶43

Sd/(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ) JUDGE

¶44

PK CT-SG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Country Club (India) Limited v. Sri Nallappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Country Club (India) Limited v. Sri Nallappa

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

J Angelin Saphier Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Rahul M Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr. Chandrahasa Keshava Shetty, Vs the State of Karnataka

Mohammed Arif Mohiuddin @ Arif Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Shashikanth Bhat Vs Sri Yashvanth Shetty

Faizal Ahmed @ Kadruli Faizal @ Mandi Fail @ Panch Vs State of Karnataka