Shri. Prajwal S/O Mahantesh Kallannavar Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shri. Prajwal S/O Mahantesh Kallannavar Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings in Crime No.13/2020 registered by CEN Police Station, Haveri on 30/06/2020 — for offences punishable under Sections 66(C), 66(D), 66(E), 67 and 67(B) of the IT Act and Sections 354(C), 504 r/w 34 IPC, pending before the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and CJM Court, Haveri — ought to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

Court's answer

In view of the memo filed by the learned High Court Government Pleader along with the 'C' report submitted by the Investigating Agency, the prayer in the present petition has rendered infructuous.

Ratio / Principle

The petition is dismissed as having become infructuous; however, if the Investigating Agency files any adverse report against the petitioners, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad (V. Srishananda J.), 14-01-2026: Criminal Petition No. 100224 of 2021 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (parallel reference 528 BNSS) sought quashing of the entire proceedings in Crime No.13/2020 registered by CEN Police Station, Haveri on 30/06/2020 for offences under Sections 66(C), 66(D), 66(E), 67 and 67(B) of the IT Act and Sections 354(C), 504 r/w 34 IPC, pending before the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn) and CJM Court, Haveri, insofar as the two petitioners (Prajwal, son of co-petitioner Mahantesh Kallannavar) were concerned. At the admission hearing the learned High Court Government Pleader (Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil) filed a memo along with the 'C' report submitted by the Investigating Agency; the court held that the prayer in the petition had thereby rendered infructuous, and dismissed the petition as infructuous, expressly reserving liberty to the petitioners to challenge any adverse report the Investigating Agency may subsequently file, in accordance with law. No precedent was cited or engaged with; the substantive quashing question was not adjudicated and the merits were left untouched. Respondent No. 2 was Neha d/o Suresh Purad, represented by Sri Rajashekar S. Arani, Advocate.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:439 CRL.P No. 100224 of 2021

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100224 OF 2021 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)-

BETWEEN:

SHRI. PRAJWAL S/O MAHANTESH KALLANNAVAR AGE 31 YEARS, OCC. R/O PLOT NO.177, 1ST CROSS, RAMTIRTH NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016.

SHRI. MAHANTESH KALLANNAVAR AGE 50 YEARS, OCC-RETD, R/O PLOT NO.177, 1ST CROSS, RAMTIRTH NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016.

…PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. NITIN BOLABANDI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed byCHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka,Dharwad Bench

STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD, THROUGH CEN POLICE STATION, HAVERI-581104.

NEHA D/O. SURESH PURAD AGE-25 YEARS, OCC-SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O.NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE,

M.G. ROAD, HAVERI, TQ AND DIST-HAVERI-581104.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1;] SRI RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.13/2020 REGISTERED BY CEN POLICE STATION, HAVERI ON 30/06/2020 FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 66(C), 66(D), 66(E), 67, 67(B) OF THE IT ACT AND 354(C), 504 R/W 34 OF

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:439 CRL.P No. 100224 of 2021

HC-KAR

IPC, PENDING BEFORE THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND CJM COURT, HAVERI, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

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

ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA)

Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil, learned High Court

Government Pleader, has filed a memo along with the ‘C’ report submitted by the Investigating Agency. Therefore, the prayer in the present petition has rendered infructuous.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, if the Investigating Agency files any adverse report against the petitioners, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law.

Sd/(V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

AC Ct-cmu LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 31