Disposed¶52

Mr. Syed Fayaz v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Mar 2026CRL.P/703/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 Cr.P.C. / Section 528 BNSS petition allowed to be disposed of on joint compromise memo dated 04.03.2026; quashing of charge sheet in C.C.No.59961/2024 arising out of PCR No.59946/2023 (offences under Sections 419, 420, 504, 506 r/w. Section 34 IPC); Bharathinagar P.S.; X (formerly XI) ACJM Bengaluru; chit-fund-company complainant T-One Chit Private Limited; accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 14 & 16 (Syed Fayaz, Suhail Ulla Baig, Christopher @ Kicchu, Muneer, Hyder, Mohsin Pasha); settlement at intervention of well-wishers; disposal in terms of joint memo without adjudication on merits.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of in terms of Joint Memo dated 04.03.2026; proceedings in C.C.No.59961/2024 (arising out of PCR No.59946/2023) quashed insofar as petitioners-accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 16 and 14 are concerned. ¶52

Mr. Syed Fayaz Vs State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶52

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet in C.C.No.59961/2024 pending in the Court of the X (formerly XI) ACJM at Bengaluru, insofar as it concerns the petitioners, ought to be quashed in view of the settlement between the petitioners and respondent No.2 recorded in the Joint Memo dated 04.03.2026.

¶34

Court's answer

The petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo dated 04.03.2026.

¶52

Ratio / Principle

In view of the settlement entered into between the petitioners and respondent No.2, the proceedings in C.C.No.59961/2024 (arising out of PCR No.59946/2023), registered for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 504, 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC and pending on the file of XI ACJM at Bengaluru, are quashed insofar as the petitioners-accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 16 and 14 are concerned.

¶54

Key takeaways

The basis of the order was the settlement between the petitioners and respondent No.2 evidenced by the Joint Memo dated 04.03.2026, which the parties, present in person with their counsel, admitted.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing on party settlement — CRL.P No.703 of 2026 (s.482 Cr.P.C. / s.528 BNSS), High Court of Karnataka, S.R. Krishna Kumar J., 04.03.2026: Petitioners (accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 14 & 16) and respondent No.2-complainant (T-One Chit Private Limited, rep. by its Managing Director) jointly filed a compromise application with Joint Memo dated 04.03.2026 recording settlement of the dispute underlying PCR No.59946/2023 'at the intervention of the wellwishers'; parties present in person with counsel admitted the memo. Holding the petition disposed of in terms of the Joint Memo, the Court quashed the proceedings in C.C.No.59961/2024, registered for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 504, 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC and pending on the file of the XI ACJM at Bengaluru, insofar as the petitioners-accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 16 and 14 were concerned.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:13296 CRL.P No. 703 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 703 OF 2026 (482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. SYED FAYAZ AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, S/O LATE SYED AHMED, R/AT NO. 79- 4^TH STREET, ARMSTRONG STREET, BHARATI NAGAR, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 001 PHONE NO:- 98801 38658, 7975560025 ALSO R/AT NO.51, SEPPINGS ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 001

¶9

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

MR. SUHAIL ULLA BAIG AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O SHAFIULLA BAIG, R/AT NO. 119, 8^TH CROSS, NEAR MEHRA SCHOOL, SOMESHWARANAGAR, JAYANAGAR 3^RD BLOCK, BANGALORE – 560 011 PHONE NO:- 9886728448 86602 98065

¶11

MR. CHRISTOPHER @ KICCHU AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O ANTONY, R/AT NO. 39, RICHARD’S SQUARE, MEENAKSHI KOIL STREET, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 051 PHONE NO:- 9886898478 9538441756

¶12

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13296 CRL.P No. 703 of 2026

¶13

HC-KAR

¶14

MR. MUNEER AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED MUSTAFA, R/AT NO. 104, 1/8, MARIYAPPA COMPLEX, KALASIPALYAM MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 002 PHONE NO:- 94496 12176 80502 06920

¶15

MR. HYDER, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O KHADAR R/AT NO. 34, GANDHI NAGAR, KADUGANDANA HALLI (K.G. HALLI) BANGALORE – 560 049 PHONE NO:- 77607 27568

¶16

MR. MOHSIN PASHA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O NAWAB JAN, R/AT NO. 8C, 1^ST STREET, H.K.P ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 051 PHONE NO:- 98861 91263

¶17

…PETITIONERS

¶18

(BY SRI. DADESOOGUR MAKBULPAS, ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY S.P.P, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BHARATHINAGAR P.S. BANGALORE

¶21

T-ONE CHIT PRIVATE LIMITED, REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.5/1-1, GROUND FLOOR, COLONEL HILL SCHOOL ROAD, SHIVAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 051, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. TALIB KHAN, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O CHAND PASHA, R/AT NO.4, MEMORIAL STREET,

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:13296 CRL.P No. 703 of 2026

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

THIMMAIAH ROAD CROSS, OPP. TO MEMORIAL PARK, BHARATHI NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 051

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. RAJAT SUBRAMANYAM, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. ANWAR SULTANA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶28

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET IN CC NO.59961/2024 PENDING IN THE COURT OF THE X (FORMERLY XI) ACJM AT BENGALURU BETWEEN BHARTHINAGAR POLICE STATION V/S SYED FAYAZ AND OTHERS.

¶29

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

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

In this petition, petitioners have sought for the following

¶33

relief:-

¶34

“WHEREFORE, the petitioners most respectfully and humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to call for the records, quash the Charge-sheet in C.C.No.59961/2024 pending in the Court of the X^th (formerly XI^th ) A.C.J.M. at Bengaluru between Bharthinagar P.S. Vs. Syed Fayaz and others, in the interest of justice and equity..”

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners – accused and learned counsel for respondent No.2 – complainant have filed a Joint Compromise application along with Joint Memo, dated

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13296 CRL.P No. 703 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

04.03.2026 duly signed by the petitioners, respondent No.2 and

¶39

their respective counsel and the same is taken on record.

¶40

Petitioners-accused and respondent No.2-complainant

¶41

are physically present before the Court along with their respective counsel and they admit the contents of the Joint Memo dated 04.03.2026, which read as under:-

¶42

“JOINT MEMO

¶43

The petitioners and the Respondent No.2 in the above case submits as follows:

¶44

The Respondent No.2 submits that the Respondent No.2 filed the P.C.R. before the trial court for the offence under section 419, 420 & 506 of the I.P.C. against the petitioners and others and after investigation the Respondent police has filed the charge sheet against the Petitioners and others.

¶45

The Petitioners submits that at the intervention of the wellwishers the Respondent No.2 and the Petitioners settled the dispute among themselves.

¶46

WHEREFORE, the Petitioners and the Respondent No.2 submits that the charge sheet filed against the Petitioners who are the Accused No.1, 4, 5, 6, 14 & 16 discharge them from the offence under section 419, 420 & 506 of the I.P.C. in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶47

In view of the aforesaid settlement entered into

¶48

between the petitioners and respondent No.2, I pass the following:

¶49

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:13296 CRL.P No. 703 of 2026

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

ORDER

¶52

(i) The petition is disposed of in terms of the Joint

¶53

Memo, dated 04.03.2026.

¶54

(ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.59961/2024 (arising out of PCR No.59946/2023) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 504, 506 r/w. Section 34 of IPC pending on the file of XI ACJM at Bengaluru, insofar as the petitioners-accused Nos.1, 4, 5, 6, 16 and 14 are concerned are hereby quashed.

¶55

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶56

BMC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7

Mr. Syed Fayaz v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Syed Fayaz v. State of Karnataka

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

Dr.C.K.Narayana Vs Union of India

Smt. Nagarathna D H Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Mahesha. H. S. Vs the State of Karnataka

Harish @ Harish Kumar. B. v. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Venkatesha Vs the State of Karnataka

E P Abhinandana Kumar Vs Karnataka State Warehousing