Allowed

Vishwanath Khandelwal v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC7 Jan 2026CRL.P/100329/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings for offences under Sections 405, 406, 415, 420 read with 120B IPC. The petitioner, accused No.9, was placed on the same footing as accused Nos.1 to 8 whose proceedings were already quashed by an unchallenged order. Quashing granted on the ground of parity alone.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C. No.2503/2008 before Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC, Hospet, against the petitioner stand quashed.

Vishwanath Khandelwal Vs the State of Karnataka — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC-D:146 CRL.P No. 100329 of 2020

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 100329 OF 2020

¶7

(482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS))

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

VISHWANATH KHANDELWAL AGED ABOUT: 63 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, NATIONAL STEEL AND AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD., 401, MAHAKOSH HOUSE, 7/5 SOUTH TUKOGANJ INDOR: PIN:432001 (MP)

¶10

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. A.M. IKTEAR UDDIN, ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER THROUGH VC)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench.

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BADAVANE POLICE STATION, HOSAPETE-583201, BY ADDL. SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD-580011.

¶14

BADRINARAYANA LADDA S/O NANDKISHORE LADDA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, SHREENIDHI TRADING COMPANY, D.NO.345, KIRAN NIVAS, OPP: A I R, HOSAPETE-583201, BALLARI DISTRICT, NOW R/AT: D.NO.514, NATHU BUILDING, GAV BHAG, OPPOSITE JAIN

¶15

¶16

NC: 2026:KHC-D:146 CRL.P No. 100329 of 2020

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

BASTI,

¶19

SANGLI-416416, MAHARASHTRA.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI B.G. INDI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶22

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.2503/2008 (PC NO.37 OF 2008) ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) & JMFC AT HOSPET, IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, OFFENCES PUNISHABLE U/S 405, 406, 415, 420 R/W 120B OF IPC, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶23

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

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

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

¶26

Heard Sri A.M. Iktiar Uddin, learned counsel for

¶27

the petitioner; Smt.Kirtilata, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri B.G. Indi, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶28

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner

¶29

brings to the notice of this Court that the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench in Criminal Petition No.100865/2017 dated 16.01.2019.

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:146 CRL.P No. 100329 of 2020

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

He would further submit that, by the said order,

¶33

this Court quashed the pending proceedings against accused Nos.1 to 8 and that the present petitioner is accused No.9, who stands on the same footing as that of the petitioners in the aforesaid criminal petition. Therefore, the pending proceedings against the present petitioner also deserve to be quashed.

¶34

Upon enquiry, the learned High Court

¶35

Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2 thereby submit that the order dated 16.01.2019 has not been challenged and it has attained finality.

¶36

Accused No.9, being the Deputy Manager of National Steels and Agro Industries Ltd., a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, also stands on the same footing as that of the other accused persons who have already been extended the benefit of the order dated 16.01.2019.

¶37

Thus, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter and without further discussion, on the

¶38

¶39

NC: 2026:KHC-D:146 CRL.P No. 100329 of 2020

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

ground of parity alone, the prayer of the petitioner deserves

¶42

to be allowed.

¶43

Hence, the following:

¶44

ORDER

¶45

i. The petition is allowed .

¶46

ii. The pending proceedings in C.C. No.2503/2008 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Hospet, against the petitioner stand quashed.

¶47

Sd/(V.SRISHANANDA)

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

AC LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 26

Vishwanath Khandelwal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwanath Khandelwal v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Iresh S/O Mahantesh Kallasannavar Vs the State of Karnataka

Naveen S/O. Hanamaraddi Lingadhal Vs the State of Karnataka

Mallesh S/O Thirukappa Bendigeri Vs the State of Karnataka

Kiran S/O Basavaraj Badiger Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Beerappa S/O Sharanappa Valkar Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Eranna Urf Irappa Vs the State of Karnataka