Suhail v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC17 Jul 2026CRL.P/10500/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru; Justice M. Nagaprasanna; CRL.P No. 10500 of 2026; quashing of FIR on amicable settlement/compromise; Joint Memo and Joint Affidavit; Crime No.114/2026 (Crime No.0114/2026), Siddapura Police Station; offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1) r/w 3(5) BNS 2023; petition under Section 528 BNSS (Section 482 Cr.P.C.); 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bengaluru; offences private in character, not against the State; proceedings quashed qua petitioners; petition disposed; neighbourhood dispute settled by elders.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in Crime No.114/2026, pending before the 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru City, quashed qua the petitioners; Criminal Petition disposed of accordingly. ¶¶64

Suhail Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Proceedings in Crime No.114/2026, pending before the 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru City, quashed qua the petitioners; Criminal Petition disposed of accordingly.

¶¶64

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings in Crime No.114/2026, pending before the 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru City, for offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS 2023, should be quashed in view of the amicable settlement between the parties recorded in the Joint Memo and Joint Affidavit.

¶¶30

Court's answer

In light of the Joint Memo and the Joint Affidavit recording the amicable settlement, and since the offences were not against the State, the Court deemed it appropriate to accept the settlement and terminate the proceedings against the petitioners.

¶¶61

Ratio / Principle

Proceedings in Crime No.114/2026, pending before the 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru City, stand quashed qua the petitioners.

¶¶65

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition No. 10500 of 2026, filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (filed under Section 528 BNSS), sought quashing of the FIR in Crime No.0114/2026 of Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for alleged offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS 2023, pending before the 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bangalore City. During pendency, the petitioners and respondent No.2 (the original complainant) settled what they described as a trivial neighbourhood misunderstanding with the intervention of elders and family members, and filed a Joint Memo and Joint Affidavit stating the settlement was voluntary, the offences were essentially private in character and not against society at large, and respondent No.2 had no objection to quashing. The parties appeared and were identified by their counsel. Holding that the offences were not against the State, Justice M. Nagaprasanna accepted the Joint Memo, terminated the proceedings against the petitioners, and quashed the proceedings in Crime No.114/2026 qua the petitioners; the Criminal Petition was disposed of.

¶1

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

NC: 2026:KHC:36908 CRL.P No. 10500 of 2026

¶4

CNR: KAHC010489862026

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶6

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶9

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 10500 OF 2026

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SUHAIL, S/O AZGAR PASHA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/A #13, 2ND FLOOR, 5TH CROSS, MUSLIM COLONY, BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011.

¶12

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

SHOAIB, S/O AZGAR PASHA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/A #13,TH 2ND FLOOR, 5TH CROSS, MUSLIM COLONY, BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011.

¶14

AZGAR PASHA, S/O ABDUL RASHEED, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/A NO.1/1, 4TH MAIN, 1TH CROSS, MUSLIM COLONY, BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. SIRAJUDDIN AHMED, ADVOCATE)

AND:

HC-KAR

NC: 2026:KHC:36908 CRL.P No. 10500 of 2026

¶21

CNR: KAHC010489862026

¶22

STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY SIDDAPURA P.S. BANGALORE – 560011, REPRESENTED BY SPP, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE -01.

¶23

MUBARAK, S/O SYED BABU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/A NO.245/18, 4TH MAIN, MUSLIM COLONY, BYRASANDRA, JAYANAGAR, 1ST BLOCK, BANGALORE-560011.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. K. NAGESHWARAPPA, HCGP FOR R-1; SRI. NAVEED AHMED.Z, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶26

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.0114/2026 OF SIDDAPURA POLICE STATION REGISTERED FOR THE ALLEGED OFENCES U/S 115(2), 118(1), R/W 3(5) OF THE BNS 2023 AND PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF THE 2ND ADDL.CMM COURT, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE CITY AGAINST THE PETITIONERS.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

The petitioners are before this Court calling in question proceedings in Crime No.114/2026, pending before the 2^nd

¶31

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

NC: 2026:KHC:36908 CRL.P No. 10500 of 2026

¶34

CNR: KAHC010489862026

¶35

Addl. CMM Court, Bengaluru City, for the offences under Sections 115(2), 118(1) read with Section 3(5) of the BNS 2023.

¶36

Heard Sri.Sirajuddin Ahmed, learned counsel

¶37

appearing for the petitioners, Sri.K.Nageshwarappa, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1, Sri.Naveed Ahmed Z, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and have perused the material on record.

¶38

During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties to the lis have settled the dispute among themselves and have filed a Joint Memo along with Joint Affidavit which reads as follows: The said Joint Memo reads as follows:

¶39

“1. The Petitioners have filed the present Criminal Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No. 0114/2026 registered by the Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, pending before the Court of 2nd Addl. CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bangalore City, registered for the alleged offences under Section 115(2), 118(1), R/W 3(5) of the BHARATIYA NYAYA SANΗΙΤΑ, 2023.

¶40

It is submitted that the dispute between the Petitioners and the Respondent No. 2, which led to the filing of the complaint, arose out of a trivial neighborhood misunderstanding. With the intervention of elders, well-

¶41

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

NC: 2026:KHC:36908 CRL.P No. 10500 of 2026

¶44

CNR: KAHC010489862026

¶45

wishers, and family members, the parties have amicably resolved all their differences and have decided to put an end to the dispute.

¶46

The Respondent No. 2, being the original complainant, has no objection whatsoever to the quashing of the FIR in Crime No. 114/2026 and all proceedings emanating therefrom against the Petitioners.

¶47

It is submitted that the settlement has been arrived at voluntarily, without any force, fraud, coercion, or undue influence from any quarter. The parties have decided to restore peace and harmony in their neighborhood.

¶48

The offences alleged are not of a heinous nature affecting society at large and are essentially private in character. In view of the amicable settlement, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be a futile exercise and an abuse of the process of the Court, causing undue hardship to both parties.

¶49

Hence, this Joint Memo.

¶50

PRAYER

¶51

WHEREFORE, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to take this Joint Memo on record and consequently be pleased to quash the FIR and entire proceedings in Crime No.114/2026 registered by the Siddapura Police Station, Bengaluru, for the alleged offences punishable under Section 115(2), 118(1),R/W 3(5) of the BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA, 2023, pending before the Court of 2^nd Addl. CMM Court, Nrupatunga Road, Bangalore City, against the Petitioners, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶52

b) Consequently quash all further proceedings arising therefrom; and

¶53

c) Pass such other orders as deemed fit in the interest of justice.”

¶54

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:36908 CRL.P No. 10500 of 2026

¶57

CNR: KAHC010489862026

¶58

The parties to the lis are present before the Court

¶59

and are identified by their respective counsels.

¶60

In the light of the Joint Memo as quoted supra and

¶61

the Joint Affidavit being filed and offences not being against the State, I deem it appropriate to accept the same and terminate the proceedings against the petitioners in the subject petition.

¶62