Allowed

Dasharatha v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC17 Sept 2026CRL.P/4677/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings against seven accused persons. The court held that the investigation was conducted by a Head Constable who was not competent to investigate or file a charge-sheet under Rules 237 and 238 of the Karnataka Police Manual, relying on the precedent in State of Karnataka vs Chikkabala Naika. Additionally, the court found that the medical evidence did not disclose any injuries to support the prosecution case. Consequently, the charge-sheet and the ensuing proceedings in C.C. No. 30/2019 were quashed.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in C.C. No. 30/2019 arising out of Crime No. 233/2018 against petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to 7 quashed.

Dasharatha Vs State of Karnataka by — Quashing and FIR | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4677 OF 2019

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

DASHARATHA

¶11

S/O ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶12

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

RATNAMMA D/O ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶14

SURESH @ SURESH CHANRA E S/O ERANNA ERAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT NO.33, BUDHA JYOTHI LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 084

¶15

ERAPPA

¶16

S/O GALAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶21

CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶22

MANJULA W/O DASHARATHA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶23

JAYAMMA W/O KATAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶24

JANARDHANA M S/O MAHALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶25

…PETITIONERS

¶26

(BY SMT. GIRIJA PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶27

AND:

¶28

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION CHITRADURGA - 577 533 REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560 001

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶33

KATAMMA W/O GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS HOSA GOLLARAHATTI VILLAGE HOSADURGA TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT CHITRADURGA - 577 533

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI MOHAMMED AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; R2 – SERVED – UNREPRESENTED)

¶36

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.30/2019 (ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.233/2018 OF SRIRAMPURA POLICE STATION, CHITRADURGA PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.) AND J.M.F.C., HOSADURGA, CHITRADURGA FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 143, 144, 148, 323, 324, 354, 506 AND 504 R/W 149 OF IPC AND ETC.

¶37

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

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶39

ORAL ORDER

¶40

This petition is filed praying this Court to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 7 in C.C.No.30/2019 arising out of Crime No.233/2018 on

¶41

the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Hosadurga, Chitradurga for the offences punishable

¶42

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶45

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶46

under Sections 143, 144, 148, 323, 324, 354, 506, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC.

¶47

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

¶48

3. The main ground urged in the petition is that the investigation is conducted by the Head Constable (HC-1091) and the same is as against the rules under 237 and 238 of Karnataka Police Manual Rules and, the same is contended in paragraph 8 of the petition and also taken note of the general duty of the Head Constable that he should take approval of the Sub Inspector or Inspector whenever possible, before leaving the station on routine duties and so also in respect of conducting of the investigation as contemplated under 238 Rules. On the said ground, prayed this Court to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 7.

¶49

4. The counsel for the petitioners In support of his arguments, relies upon the judgment of this Court reported in ILR 2002 KAR 5151 in the case of STATE OF

¶50

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶53

KARNATAKA vs CHIKKABALA NAIKA AND OTHERS wherein this Court held that there cannot be any investigation by the Head Constable. The principle laid down in the judgment is aptly applicable to the case on hand.

¶54

5. The counsel appearing for respondent No.1/State would vehemently contend that there is a specific allegation made in the complaint that petitioners have assaulted the complainant with the stone and stick and in this regard, the investigation is also conducted.

¶55

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and also on perusal of the material on record, it is very clear that CW1 is the complainant and CW2

¶56

is the punch witness and CW4 and CW5 are the eyewitnesses. CW6 speaks about giving of complaint and CW7 is the doctor who treated the complainant. But having perused the wound certificate, it does not disclose any injuries. The certificate issued by the doctor also does not disclose any injuries except history of assault at 07.30 p.m.

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶59

¶60

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶61

and medical record is also not support with regard to the incident is concerned.

¶62

7. It is also important to note that investigation is conducted by the HC-1091 but he is not a competent person to conduct the investigation. He being a Head Constable cannot investigate the matter and file the charge sheet. Very filing of charge sheet is very defective. The material on record including the medical evidence not supported the case of the complainant and the conducting of investigation by the Head Constable is also not sustained under law. Hence, there cannot be any proceedings against the petitioners.

¶63

8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶64

following:

¶65

ORDER

¶66

The petition is allowed.

¶67

The proceedings initiated against the

¶68

petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 7 in C.C.No.30/2019 arising out of Crime No.233/2018 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge

¶69

¶70

NC: 2026:KHC:51014 CRL.P No. 4677 of 2019

¶71

HC-KAR

¶72

CNR: KAHC010171102019

¶73

(Jr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Hosadurga, Chitradurga for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 144, 148, 323, 324, 354, 506, 504 read with Section 149 of IPC is hereby quashed.

¶74

Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE

¶75

Dasharatha v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dasharatha v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases