Disposed¶130

Sri Samiyuddin Shaik v. State of Karnataka by

Karnataka HC24 Apr 2026CRL.P/7337/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on settlement between parties; compounding application accepted, offences not against the State; compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 r/w S.151 CPC decreed in O.S. No.484/2025 and disposed before Lok Adalat; BNS 2023 Ss.318(4), 329(4), 351(2), 352 (IPC Ss.420, 448, 506, 504); landlord-tenant security deposit Rs.12,00,000; settlement payment Rs.6,00,000; Kothanur Police Station Crime No.103/2025; inherent powers S.528 BNSS.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition disposed; proceedings in Crime No.103 of 2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, before the XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, against the petitioner quashed upon acceptance of the compounding application. ¶130

Sri Samiyuddin Shaik Vs State of Karnataka by — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶130

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings in Crime No.103 of 2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, pending before the XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, against the petitioner ought to be quashed in view of the compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties. +1 more

¶28

Court's answer

The proceedings pending in Crime No.103 of 2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, before the XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, against the petitioner stand quashed.

¶130

Ratio / Principle

In the light of the application for compounding filed along with the affidavit, and since the offences are not against the State, the Court deemed it appropriate to accept the compounding application and terminate the proceedings against the petitioner.

¶126

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition (NC: 2026:KHC:22827; CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025, decided 24.04.2026 by M. Nagaprasanna, J.) under S.482 Cr.P.C./S.528 BNSS sought quashing of FIR Crime No.103/2025 of Kothanur Police Station (Ss.318(4), 329(4), 351(2), 352 BNS 2023; Ss.420, 448, 506, 504 IPC) pending before the XXIX Addl. CJM, Bengaluru, arising from a landlord-tenant deposit dispute over Flat No.1010 DS Max Sky City. During pendency, the petitioner (flat owner) and respondent No.2 (occupant) settled their disputes: a joint compromise under Order XXIII Rule 3 r/w S.151 CPC in O.S. No.484/2025 was decreed on 05.03.2026 and disposed of before the Lok Adalat on 14.03.2026, the petitioner paying Rs.6,00,000/- and obtaining vacant possession. On the compounding application supported by affidavit, the offences not being against the State, the Court accepted the compounding, terminated the proceedings and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner; petition disposed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7337 OF 2025

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SRI SAMIYUDDIN SHAIK S/O. SIRAJUDDIN SHAIK AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT BG-01 SHRI HARI RESIDENCY 9^TH MAIN, VEERANNAPALYA VYALIKAVAL HBCS LAYOUT NAGAVARA BENGALURU - 560 045.

¶11

… PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI: TEJAS N.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KOTHANUR POLICE BENGALURU - 560 077.

¶16

(REPRESENTED BY LEARNED STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HCK, BANGALORE - 01)

¶17

SRI. NOUMAN TALHA ADIL S/O. ADIL PASHA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT FLAT NO.1010 DS MAX SKY CITY

¶18

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

HC-KAR

THANISANDRA

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI: ANOOP KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1; SRI: SYED NASEERUDDIN, ADV FOR R2)

¶24

THIS CRL.P. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.PC (FILED UNDER SECTION 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.103/2025 OF KOTHANUR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE XXIX ADDL. CJM, BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 318(4), 329(4), 351(2) AND 352 OF BNS, 2023 (SECTIONS 420, 448, 506 AND 504 OF IPC) AND THE CONSEQUENT INVESTIGATION AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW.

¶25

THIS CRL.P, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in Crime No.103 of 2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, pending before the XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, registered for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 329(4), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023 (Sections 420, 448, 506 and 504 of IPC).

¶29

Heard Sri Tejas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Anoop Kumar, learned High Court Government

¶30

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

Pleader appearing for respondent No.1, Sri Syed Naseeruddin, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and have perused the material on record.

¶34

During the pendency of these it transpires that the parties to the lis have settled their dispute and they have filed joint compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural in OS No.484 of 2025, which came to be allowed before the Lok Adalath on 14.03.2026 and have placed on record such compromise petition along with the affidavit. Terms of compromise petition reads as follows:

¶35

" COMPROMISE PETITION UNDER ORDER XXIII RULES 3 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908

¶36

The plaintiffs and defendants most respectfully submits as follows:-

¶37

It is submitted that the intervention of wellwishers, relatives and friends has suggested to settle the matter amicably out of the court. Now the Plaintiffs and defendant No.2 have settled the matter amicably out of the court and Plaintiffs and Defendant No.2 have no objection to decree the suit as prayed for. As such the defendant No. 1 is placed as ex-parte by this Hon'ble court.

¶38

It is submitted that the Plaintiffs are the rightful owner of the property Flat Number 1010 DS

¶39

¶40

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

MAX SKYCITY, Chokkanahalli Village, Thanisandra Main Road, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560064, (hereinafter referred to as the "Property").

¶43

It is submitted that the defendant No.2 is currently in possession of the Property based on the Rent agreement executed on 13 Nov 2023 between plaintiff and defendant No.1 Tanzanite Realty India Pvt Itd, Represented by its Director, Mr. Syed Ahmed Hussain, S/o Syed Nisar Ahmed, Aadhar No: 8631 1171 4743, where the scheduled property is let-out on rent basis and defendant No.1 agreed to pay of Rs:47,500/-(Forty Seven Thousand five Hundred Only) rent monthly.

¶44

It is submitted that in the rent agreement between Plaintiffs and defendant No.1, as defendant No.1 being the company, Mr Nouman Ali Talha (Aadhar No: 6879 4805 9780) i.e. defendant No.2 is present in rent agreement and will be using the property for the residential purpose for his family till the validity of the agreement.

¶45

It is submitted that There is no written permission or consent from the plaintiff for the subtenancy in the above rent agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1.

¶46

It is submitted that as the primary rent agreement is expired on 13 Oct 2024, and the Plaintiff don't want to extent the agreement based on the delayed and non-payments of rents, have asked the Defendant No.1 to give vacant possession of the property.

¶47

It is submitted that Defendant No.1 and Defendant No.2 have requested multiple extensions of times to vacate the property, and Plaintiff agreed on humanitarian grounds to keep and settle matter peacefully and have requested to vacate the property as final date of 31 Jan 2025.

¶48

It is submitted that defendant No.1 and defendant No.2 have agreed to vacate the property on the extended date of 31 Jan 2025.

¶49

¶50

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

It is submitted that on date of 31 Jan 2025, Defendant No.2 denied to vacate the flat claiming he has not received his deposit of Rs12,00,000 (Twelve Lakhs Rupees)/- from Defendant No1.

¶53

10.It is submitted that the Defendant No.2 is claiming he has made a payment of Rs12,00,000 (Twelve Lakhs Rupees) to the Defendant No.1 as security deposit in agreement between the Defendant No.1 and Defendant No.2, which Plaintiff is not informed or aware.

¶54

11.lt is submitted that whereas it has subsequently come to light that Defendant No.1 - Tanzanite Realty India Pvt. Ltd. has committed fraudulent acts and absconded with funds. 12.It is submitted that as Defendant No.1 is absconding and not traceable from that date, Defendant No.2 has lodged a FIR No 0017/2025 against Defendant No.1 Tanzanite Realty India Pvt ltd, Represented by its Director, Mr. Syed Ahmed Hussain. 13. It is submitted that Defendant No.2 is staying and enjoying in the possession of the property without paying the rent for last 15 months, Plaintiff want the vacant possession of the property.

¶55

14.It is submitted that now, therefore, to avoid prolonged disputes and litigation, the Plaintiff and Defendant No.2 have decided to enter into compromise to resolve all matters amicably between themselves.

¶56

15.It is submitted that the Plaintiff and defendant No.2 have mutually agreed to settle all disputes regarding the occupation and possession of the Property for a sum of 6,00,000 (Six Lakh Rupees Only).

¶57

16.It is submitted that the Plaintiff agrees to pay the Defendant No.2 a sum of 6,00,000(Six Lakh Rupees Only) as part of a settlement for all claims, demands, and disputes arising out of the defendant No.2 occupation of the Property.

¶58

¶59

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

It is submitted that the defendant No.2 agrees that no further claims will be made against the Plaintiffs upon receiving the Rs6,00,000 (Six Lakh Rupees Only) as towards full and final settlement of all claims, dues, and disputes arising out of or connected with the possession of the property.

¶62

18.It is submitted that Defendant No.2 agrees to relinquish and handover the possession of the property peacefully and in good condition and ensure there are no outstanding dues of CAM charges or obligations with the Facilities Management Committee (FMC) of the DSMAX SKYCITY apartment and clear BESCOM bills on or before 06th March 2026.

¶63

19.It is submitted that the payment is made by the Plaintiff to the Defendant No.2 on or before 06th of March 2026, payment done through online transfer to bank Account No: 50100477813604, HDFC Bank, Sum on 6,00,000(Six lakhs Only).

¶64

20.It is submitted that the plaintiff and defendant No.2 here by confirms that they will withdraw all the civil and criminal cases active before the courts and will not claim any civil and criminal cases in future against the Plaintiffs.

¶65

21.It is submitted that Plaintiff and Defendant No.2 agreed to file a joint PCR with equally shared cost against the Tenant - Tanzanite Realty India Pvt ltd, represented by its Director, Mr. Syed Ahmed Hussain, to bring him to justice for the cheating he has done to Plaintiff and Defendant No.2 for the claim of rent dues and deposit with relevant sections of CPC and BNS.

¶66

22.It is submitted that Defendant No.2 shall not withdraw the FIR No.0017/2025 against the Defendant No.1, and should perceive it to bring Defendant No.1 to the justice and to get his security deposit.

¶67

23.It is submitted that as and when the Defendant No.2 gets the security the Defendant No.2 agrees to deposit from Defendant No.1 return the sum

¶68

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

of Rs6,00,000 (Six Lakh Rupees Only) to the Plaintiffs received as part of this compromise within 1 day of receiving the amount.

¶71

24.It is submitted that in case Defendant No.1 does not return the security deposit to the Defendant No.2, the Defendant No.2 shall not be required to return the Rs.6,00,000(Six Lakh Rupees Only) to the Plaintiffs and the settlement between the Plaintiffs and defendant No.2 shall remain intact, And also no further monetary or legal claims of any nature shall survive against the Plaintiffs in relation to the said property or any agreement executed through Tanzanite Realty India Pvt. Ltd by Defendant No.2.

¶72

Both Parties affirm and acknowledge that this compromise constitutes a full and final settlement, and neither Party shall initiate or pursue any civil or criminal proceedings against the other in respect of the said transaction.

¶73

Both the parties agrees that they must with draw all the pending cases filed against each other below as Follows:

¶74

a) Vide FIR No.103/2025 Kothanur P.S at Bengaluru lodged by the Defendant No.2 against the Plaintiff same will be withdrawn by the defendant No.2 on his own cost.

¶75

b) Writ petition No.13845/2025 Filed by the Defendant No.2 against the Plaintiff pending before Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru will be withdrawn by the defendant No.2 on his own cost.

¶76

c) Writ petition No.10109/2025 Filed by the Defendant No.2 against the Plaintiff pending before Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru will be withdrawn by the defendant No.2 on his own cost.

¶77

d) Original Suit No.25137/2025 Filed by the Defendant No.2 against the Plaintiff Pending Before the CCH-22, Mayo hall City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengalurü will be withdrawn by the defendant No.2 on his own cost.

¶78

¶79

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶80

HC-KAR

¶81

e) PCR No 67974/2025 Filed by the plaintiff against the Defendant No.2 Pending Before the ADDL CIM-29, Addl Chief Judicial Magistrate Mayo hall, at Bengaluru will be withdrawn by the Plaintiff on his own cost.

¶82

It is submitted that nothing in this compromise petition shall prevent either party from initiating independent legal proceedings against Tanzanite Realty India Pvt. Ltd., and its representatives for the alleged fraud. misappropriation, or other criminal acts committed.

¶83

28.It is submitted by the plaintiff before this Hon'ble court to direct remit/refund the necessary court fee paid by the plaintiff in this suit.

¶84

PRAYER

¶85

Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to decree the above suit considering terms of compromise petition and also to direct the office to refund the court fee paid by the plaintiff. In the interest of justice and equality.

¶86

The Court below vide order dated 05.03.2026

¶87

recorded the compromise as under:

¶88

"The Plaintiff, defendant No.2 and their learned counsels Sri MS and Sri.SN are present.

¶89

The plaintiff and defendant No.2 filed compromise petition U/o 23 Rule 3 r/w Sec.151 of CPC. The Plaintiff and defendant No.2 submit that, they have amicably settled the dispute in terms of compromise petition and compromise petition may be accepted and decree may be drawn in terms of the compromise petition.

¶90

The plaintiff and the defendant No.2 have produce their Aadhar cards for their identification, perused found proper. Original Aadhar cards returned

¶91

¶92

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶93

HC-KAR

¶94

to respective parties and copies of same are retained in the case file.

¶95

The terms and conditions of the compromise petition are read over and explained to the parties. They accepted the terms and conditions of the compromise petition are true and correct. They further admits that, they have amicably settled the dispute with their free consent. Since the parties have amicably settled their dispute and there appears no unlawful object in the compromise petition, hence, the compromise petition filed by the parties is accepted and court pass following:

¶96

ORDER

¶97

The compromise petition filed by the parties U/o 23 Rule 3 of CPC is hereby accepted.

¶98

The suit is decreed in terms of compromise petition.

¶99

The compromise petition shall form part and parcel of the decree.

¶100

Draw decree in accordance with law the compromise petition.

¶101

In view of the settlement arrived between parties the office is hereby directed to refund the court fee to the plaintiff.

¶102

5. The matter was listed before the Lok Adalath and

¶103

on 14.03.2026, it is held as under:

¶104

"Matter is taken before the Lok-Adalath. In view of the compromise petition filed by the parties, the matter is disposed of."

¶105

The petitioner has filed an Affidavit before this

¶106

Court, which reads as under:

¶107

10 -

¶108

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶109

HC-KAR

¶110

"AFFIDAVIT

¶111

I, Samiyuddin Shaik, S/o. Sirajuddin Shaik, aged about 45 years, R/at: BG-01, Shri Hari Residency, 9th main, Veerannapalya, Vyalikaval Nagavara, Bengaluru HBCS Layout, 560 045, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:-

¶112

1. I am the petitioner in the above petition. I am well conversant with the facts of this case and hence swearing to this affidavit.

¶113

2. I submit that, second respondent had lodged a complaint before Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, alleging that he had entered into a lease agreement with one Syed Ahmed Hussain for a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- in the presence of the flat owner, and that after a period of about three months, the said Syed Ahmed Hussain became untraceable and failed to return the lease deposit amount. He further alleged that on 25-02-2025, the owner of the said flat, namely Samiyuddin Shaik/petitioner, unlawfully came near the flat, created nuisance, trespassed into the premises, brought unknown persons, caused disturbance, disconnected the electricity supply to the said flat, and based on his complaint, an F.I.R. in Crime No.103/2025 has been registered at Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 329(4), 351(2), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which is presently pending on the file of the Hon'ble XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru.

¶114

3. I, the petitioner, submit that I and the second respondent have amicably settled the dispute and accordingly filed a joint compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC read with Section 151 CPC before the Hon'ble Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural, in O.S. No.484/2025, which came to be allowed before the Lok Adalat on 14-03-2026, wherein it was agreed that all cases filed against each other, including Crime No.103/2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, and other connected matters, shall be withdrawn and that the terms of the compromise shall be binding on both parties. I further submit that in terms of the settlement, I have paid a sum of

¶115

11 -

¶116

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶117

HC-KAR

¶118

Rs.6,00,000/- to the second respondent by way of bank transfer to his HDFC Bank account bearing No.50100477813604 on 01-03-2026 and 03-03-2026 towards vacating the schedule property, and accordingly, the second respondent has vacated the schedule property on 03-03-2026 and handed over vacant possession of the same to me, thereby fully complying with the terms of the compromise. Copy of compromise petition in O.S. No.484/2025 is herewith produced along with this affidavit.

¶119

4. Though I have been consistently insisting that the second respondent comply with the terms of the compromise by taking steps to withdraw the case in Crime No.103/2025 of Kothanur Police Station, which been stayed by this Hon'ble Court in the present petition, the second respondent is deliberately avoiding the same on one pretext or another and is not cooperating for withdrawal of the case, despite having received the agreed sum in full under the compromise. The second respondent is also not appearing before this Hon'ble Court and is evading the process by giving evasive replies, and as such, in view of the binding compromise recorded under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC and the settlement arrived at between the parties, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to exercise its inherent powers under Section 528 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and quash the F.I.R. and complaint in Crime No.103/2025 of Kothanur Police Station in the interest of justice and equity.

¶120

I do hereby, declare that the name and signature of me and the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief."

¶121

The petitioner is present before the Court and is identified by his counsel.

¶122

In the light of application for compounding being filed along with the affidavit and offences not being against the

¶123

12 -

¶124

NC: 2026:KHC:22827 CRL.P No. 7337 of 2025

¶125

HC-KAR

¶126

State, I deem it appropriate to accept the compounding application and terminate the proceedings against the petitioner in the subject petition.

¶127

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶128

ORDER

¶129

i. Criminal Petition stands disposed.

¶130

ii. Proceedings pending in Crime No.103 of 2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, before the XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, against the petitioner stands quashed.

¶131

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

¶132

BGN List No.: 4 Sl No.: 30

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
FIR in Crime No.103/2025 of Kothanur Police Station, Bengaluru, registered for offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 329(4), 351(2) and 352 of BNS, 2023 (Sections 420, 448, 506 and 504 of IPC), with consequent investigation and pending proceedings, challenged as abuse of process.¶24
XXIX Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru
Prior proceeding
During pendency, the parties settled their dispute and filed a joint compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 read with Section 151 of CPC before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural in O.S. No.484 of 2025, which came to be allowed before the Lok Adalath on 14.03.2026.¶34
Prior proceeding
The Court below (Principal Senior Civil Judge) vide order dated 05.03.2026 recorded the compromise between the plaintiff and defendant No.2.¶86
Prior proceeding
The trial court accepted the compromise petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC, decreed the suit in terms of the compromise petition (which was made part and parcel of the decree) and directed refund of court fee to the plaintiff.¶98
Prior proceeding
The matter was taken before the Lok Adalath and on 14.03.2026 was disposed of in view of the compromise petition filed by the parties.¶104
Prior proceeding
Background per compromise recitals: Flat No.1010 DS Max Sky City was let to defendant No.1 Tanzanite Realty India Pvt. Ltd. (monthly rent Rs.47,500) with defendant No.2 in possession; defendant No.2 claimed to have paid Rs.12,00,000 as security deposit to defendant No.1, who allegedly committed fraudulent acts and absconded; defendant No.2 lodged FIR No.0017/2025 against defendant No.1 and its director Syed Ahmed Hussain.¶54
Prior proceeding
Compromise terms included mutual withdrawal of proceedings: defendant No.2 to withdraw the subject FIR No.103/2025 (Kothanur P.S.) at his own cost, besides W.P. Nos.13845/2025 and 10109/2025 and O.S. No.25137/2025; the plaintiff to withdraw PCR No.67974/2025.¶74

Sri Samiyuddin Shaik v. State of Karnataka by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Samiyuddin Shaik v. State of Karnataka by

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

Ramachandra Vs State of Karnataka

Govindswamy Vs State of Karnataka

Mr. Revuttappa Donura @ Ravi @ Raju Vs State by Karnataka

Sri. Sathish Naik.M Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri. Nazarulla Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Chikkamma Vs the State of Karnataka