Dismissed

Sri Ananthakrishna Shanbhag Katapadi v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Jun 2026CRL.P/8158/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka considered two criminal petitions one seeking to quash proceedings for breach of protection and the other challenging an interim order under the DV Act The court held that Session Court has jurisdiction to enforce orders under Section 31 and deemed the State's participation as complainant valid for execution purposes Rejecting the petitions the court dismissed them as l

What did the court decide?

The petitions seeking quashing of criminal proceedings and setting aside the interim order were rejected as they lacked merit.

Sri Ananthakrishna Shanbhag Katapadi Vs the State of… — Domestic Violence | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶4

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶6

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶9

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8158 OF 2026

¶10

C/W

¶11

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7464 OF 2026

¶12

IN CRL.P No. 8158/2026

¶13

BETWEEN:

¶14

SRI. ANANTHAKRISHNA SHANBHAG KATAPADI S/O LATE KATAPADI SHANTHARAM SHENOY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/A DOOR NO. 12-100, LAXMI NAGAR, LAXMI COFFEE WORKS, TENKANIDIYOOR, KRODASHRAMA, UDUPI - 576 106.

¶15

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K

¶16

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶17

SMT. ANKITHA ANANTHKRISHNA SHANBHAG, W/O ANANTHAKRISHNA SHANBHAG, KATAPADI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO. 12-100, LAXMI NAGAR, LAXMI COFFEE WORKS, TENKANIDIYOOR, KRODASHRAMA, UDUPI - 576 106.

¶18

…PETITIONERS

¶19

(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M.R, ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

¶22

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶25

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶26

YESHWANTHPURA POLREPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶27

…RESPONDENT

¶28

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, SPP-I)

¶29

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, UDUPI AGAINST THE PETITIONERS IN SPL.CASE NO.44/2026 U/S 31 AND 32 OF D.V ACT WHICH IS PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE PRL.DIST. AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT UDUPI.

¶30

IN CRL.P NO. 7464/2026

¶31

BETWEEN:

¶32

SRI. ANANTHAKRISHNA SHANBHAG KATAPADI S/O LATE KATAPADI SHANTHARAM SHENOY, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/A DOOR NO. 12-100, LAXMI NAGAR, LAXMI COFFEE WORKS, TENKANIDIYOOR, KRODASHRAMA, UDUPI - 576 106.

¶33

SMT. ANKITHA ANANTHKRISHNA SHANBHAG, W/O ANANTHAKRISHNA SHANBHAG, KATAPADI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO. 12-100, LAXMI NAGAR, LAXMI COFFEE WORKS, TENKANIDIYOOR, KRODASHRAMA, UDUPI - 576 106.

¶34

ARUNANADA SWAMIJI S/O LINGAPPA,

¶35

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶39

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT ARUNANANDA SWAMIJI MATHA, UDYAVARA, UDUPI - 574 118 AND ALSO R/AT MAHAKALI MAHASANSTHAN SADHARMA, OM SHAKTHI PITA, RASAI SHENDUR, NIPANI, BELGAUM - 591 237.

¶40

...PETITIONERS

¶41

(BY SRI. BALAKRISHNA M.R, ADVOCATE)

¶42

AND:

¶43

SMT. SRILAXMI SHANTHARAM SHENOY W/O LATE KATAPADI SHANTHARAM SHENOY, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT 17-128, LAXMI NAGAR, LAXMI COFFEE WORKS, TENKANIDIYOOR, KRODASHRAMA, UDUPI - 576 106.

¶44

...RESPONDENT

¶45

(BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, SPP-I)

¶46

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 09.04.2026 PASSED BY THE HONBLE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT UDUPI IN CRL.RP NO.15/2026 PASSED ON THE APPLICATION FILED U/S 438 OF BNSS R/W 23 OF DV ACT BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶47

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

¶48

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶49

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶52

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶53

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶54

ORAL ORDER

¶55

The petitioners/accused are before the Court seeking the

¶56

following prayers in both these cases.

¶57

Prayer in Crl.P.No.8158/2026 :

¶58

"a) Call for the entire records in Spl.Case.No.44/2026 on the file of Hon'ble Principal District and Sessions Judge at Udupi.,

¶59

b) Quash the entire criminal proceedings initiated by the Public Prosecutor, Udupi against the petitioners in Spl.Case.No.44/2026, u/ss.31 and 32 of DV Act which is pending on the file of Hon'ble Principal District and Sessions Judge at Udupi.

¶60

c) Pass such other relief/reliefs as this Hon'ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstance of the present case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶61

Prayer in Crl.P.No.7464/2026 :

¶62

"a) Call for the entire records in Crl.R.P.No.15/2026 on the file of Hon'ble Principal District and Sessions Judge at Udupi.,

¶63

b) Set aside the order dt.09.04.2026 passed by the Hon'ble Principal District and Sessions Judge at Udupi in Crl.R.P. No.15/2026 passed on the application filed u/s 438 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 r/w 23 of DV Act by the Respondent.

¶64

c) Pass such other relief/reliefs as this Hon'ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstance of the present case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶65

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶68

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶69

Heard Sri. Balakrishna M.R., learned counsel

¶70

appearing for the petitioners and Sri. B.N. Jagadeesha, learned State Public Prosecutor - I appearing for the respondent.

¶71

Facts in brief germane are as follows:

¶72

The petitioners allege that the first petitioner's father executed a will bequeathing certain movable and immovable property in favour of the first petitioner and his mother, who subsequently passed away on 13.01.2024. The first petitioner's mother files Crl.Misc.No.117/2026 against the petitioners, invoking Sections 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('the Act' for short) and also an order to be passed under Section 12 of the Act. The mother of the first petitioner was granted partial relief by grant of an ex-parte interim order where the first petitioner was restrained from withdrawal of capital gains or trading out of a certain account. No restraint was granted with regard to sale or purchase of securities. The first petitioner's mother then files a Criminal Revision petition in Crl.RP.No.15/2026 under Section 23 of the Act and Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

¶73

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶76

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶77

Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 to set aside the orders passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.117/2026, insofar as it denies the complete relief that was sought for by the mother of the first petitioner. On 04.04.2026, the first petitioner's mother also sets the criminal law into motion by registering a crime in crime No.40/2026 alleging that the petitioners had forged the signature of the father of the first petitioner and had fabricated the Will to gain properties. The Criminal Revision petition so filed under the Act was ordered on 09.04.2026. The mother of the petitioners granted an ex-parte order restraining the first petitioner from paying more than Rs.1,00,000/- towards charity and alienating the shares in common business holdings. It was further ordered that the first petitioner must assist in his sister's marriage and other social and religious obligations. Petitioners files Crl.P.No.7464/2026 calling in question the orders that are passed in Crl.RP.No.15/2026. The other criminal petition No.8158/2026 is filed by the petitioners calling in question the crime so registered in Spl.Case.No.44/2026 for offences punishable under Sections 31 and 32 of the Act.

¶78

¶79

HC-KAR

¶80

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶81

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶82

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the order and revision petition is contrary to law, as the revision petitioner, the mother had an alternative and efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under Section 29 of the Act and could not have invoked the revisional jurisdiction of the concerned Court. The Revisional Court had no jurisdiction to pass an order in Criminal Revision petition No.15/2026, as it was the jurisdiction of the Magistrate under the Act.

¶83

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the Act indicates that the magistrate shall exercise power as far as possible. It is not a suo motu case registered by the Public Prosecutor, as is alleged, it is a case where the aid of the Public Prosecutor is taken for execution of the orders passed by the concerned Court.

¶84

In the teeth of the aforesaid submissions, it requires to be considered whether the Court of Session has jurisdiction to grant protection orders in exercise of powers under Sections 31 and 32 of the Act. It is necessary to notice certain provisions of the Act. Sections 18, 23, 26, 28, and 31 of

¶85

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶86

HC-KAR

¶87

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶88

the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005,

¶89

reads as under:

¶90

18. Protection orders .—The Magistrate may, after giving the aggrieved person and the respondent an opportunity of being heard and on being prima facie satisfied that domestic violence has taken place or is likely to take place, pass a protection order in favour of the aggrieved person and prohibit the respondent from—

¶91

(a) committing any act of domestic violence;

¶92

(b) aiding or abetting in the commission of acts of domestic violence;

¶93

(c) entering the place of employment of the aggrieved person or, if the person aggrieved is a child, its school or any other place frequented by the aggrieved person;

¶94

(d) attempting to communicate in any form, whatsoever, with the aggrieved person, including personal, oral or written or electronic or telephonic contact;

¶95

(e) alienating any assets, operating bank lockers or bank accounts used or held or enjoyed by both the parties, jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent or singly by the respondent, including her stridhan or any other property held either jointly by the parties or separately by them without the leave of the Magistrate;

¶96

(f) causing violence to the dependants, other relatives or any person who give the aggrieved person assistance from domestic violence; (g) committing any other act as specified in the protection order.

¶97

23. Power to grant interim and ex parte orders .—(1) In any proceeding before him under this

¶98

¶99

HC-KAR

¶100

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶101

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶102

Act, the Magistrate may pass such interim order as he deems just and proper.

¶103

(2) If the Magistrate is satisfied that an application prima facie discloses that the respondent is committing, or has committed an act of domestic violence or that there is a likelihood that the respondent may commit an act of domestic violence, he may grant an ex parte order on the basis of the affidavit in such form, as may be prescribed, of the aggrieved person under section18, section 19, section 20, section 21 or, as the case may be, section 22 against the respondent.

¶104

26. Relief in other suits and legal proceedings.—( 1) Any relief available under sections 18, 19,20, 21 and 22 may also be sought in any legal proceeding, before a civil court, family court or a criminal court, affecting the aggrieved person and the respondent whether such proceeding was initiated before or after the commencement of this Act.

¶105

(2) Any relief referred to in sub-section (1) may be sought for in addition to and along with any other relief that the aggrieved person may seek in such suit or legal proceeding before a civil or criminal court.

¶106

(3) In case any relief has been obtained by the aggrieved person in any proceedings other than a proceeding under this Act, she shall be bound to inform the Magistrate of the grant of such relief.

¶107

28. Procedure.—(1) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, all proceedings under sections 12,18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 and offences under section 31 shall be governed by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).

¶108

(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) shall prevent the court from laying down its own procedure for disposal of an application under section 12 or under sub-section (2) of section 23.

¶109

31. Penalty for breach of protection order by respondent .—(1) A breach of protection order, or of an

¶110

10 -

¶111

HC-KAR

¶112

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶113

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶114

interim protection order, by the respondent shall be an offence under this Act and shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to twenty thousand rupees, or with both.

¶115

(2) The offence under sub-section (1) shall as far as practicable be tried by the Magistrate who had passed the order, the breach of which has been alleged to have been caused by the accused.

¶116

(3) While framing charges under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may also frame charges under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or any other provision of that Code or the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961), as the case may be, if the facts disclose the commission of an offence under those provisions."

¶117

Section 18 of the Act permits Magistrate to pass an order on prima facie being satisfied that domestic violence has taken place or likely to take place by protecting such acts by passing a protective order; alienating any assets, operating bank lockers or bank accounts used or held or enjoyed by both the parties, jointly by the aggrieved person is also dealt with under clause (e) of Section 18 of the Act ( supra ). The Magistrate who is hearing the matter has power to grant an ex-parte orders under Section 23(2) of the Act ( supra ). Section 31 of the Act deals with penalty for breach of protection. The penalty for breach of protection can be instituted under Section 31(2) of the Act not restricting it to Magistrate or a Civil Court or a

¶118

11 -

¶119

HC-KAR

¶120

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶121

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶122

Criminal Court or a Family Court, who had passed the order. This is the purport of the law laid down by the High Court of Bombay in the case of PRAMODINI VIJAY FERNANDES Vs. VIJAY FERNANDES, reported in 2010 SCC ONLINE BOM 246 , wherein it has held as follows:

¶123

"7. Consequently, the words “Magistrate who had passed the order” in section 31(2) must be read as “ Magistrate or a Civil or Criminal Court or a Family Court who had passed the order” . This applies to any legal proceeding which was pending before that Court, an application under the aforesaid sections is made before that Court and a protection order or an interim protection is passed by that Court. "

¶124

In the light of the issue answered by the High Court of Bombay, to which I am in respectful agreement of, the challenge to the ordered passed by the concerned Court under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act fails.

¶125

What remains is the challenge to the proceedings in Special Case No.44/2026. The Special Case No.44/2026 has arisen out of in terms of Sections 31 and 32 of the Act. Submissions galore with regard to the State being made the complainant in the case where the domestic violence is alleged.

¶126

In the first blush , the said submission would merit acceptance, but on a deeper delving, it is seen that for execution of the

¶127

12 -

¶128

HC-KAR

¶129

NC: 2026:KHC:31537 CRL.P No. 8158 of 2026 C/W CRL.P No. 7464 of 2026

¶130

CNR: KAHC010390732026

¶131

orders that are passed in terms of Sections 31 and 32 of the

¶132

Act, the assistance of the State is necessary. Therefore, the State is shown as the complainant, which would not vitiate the proceedings in the considered view of this Court.

¶133

In that light, both these petitions lacking in merit stands rejected .

¶134

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶135

JUDGE

¶136

JY List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17

Sri Ananthakrishna Shanbhag Katapadi v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Ananthakrishna Shanbhag Katapadi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases