Disposed¶51

Sri. Irfan Ahmed v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jan 2026WP/31655/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of criminal proceedings on amicable settlement/compounding of offences via joint memo and joint affidavit; non-cognizable offences Sections 504, 506 IPC; charges under Sections 143, 323, 324, 149 IPC; Articles 226 and 227 Constitution of India with Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973; C.C.No.101/2024, Senior Civil Judge and JMFC Sidlaghatta, Chikkaballapura; related cases Cr. No. 40/2024, 41/2024, 47/2024 and Cr. No. 119/2023; parties Irfan Ahmed, Imran Ahmed, Sibgath Ulla, Mufeez, Johar Fathima v. State of Karnataka and Naseer Pasha; Justice M. Nagaprasanna; outcome: petition disposed, proceedings quashed.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C.No.101/2024 pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sidlaghatta, upon acceptance of the joint memo and joint affidavit recording compounding of offences.

Sri. Irfan Ahmed Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶51

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.101/2024 against the petitioners (accused Nos.1 to 5) should be quashed in view of the parties' amicable settlement by compounding the offences, recorded in a joint memo and joint affidavit.

¶34

Court's answer

Although the charges include Sections 504 and 506 IPC (non-cognizable offences), since the dispute is between the parties themselves and the allegations are not against the State, the Court deemed it appropriate to accept the joint memo and joint affidavit recording the amicable settlement/compounding and to terminate the proceedings against the petitioners.

¶48

Ratio / Principle

The criminal petition is disposed of, and the proceedings in C.C.No.101/2024 pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sidlaghatta, stand quashed.

¶52

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (M. Nagaprasanna, J.), W.P. No. 31655 of 2024 (GM-RES), decided 13-01-2026: Accused Nos.1 to 5 in C.C.No.101/2024 (Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sidlaghatta), prosecuted for offences under Sections 143, 323, 324, 504, 506 and 149 IPC, approached the Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 to quash the proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 jointly submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings the parties had settled their disputes amicably by compounding the offences, evidenced by a joint memo and joint affidavit. Though Sections 504 and 506 IPC are non-cognizable offences, the Court held that since the dispute is inter se the parties and the allegations are not against the State, it deemed it appropriate to accept the joint memo and joint affidavit and terminate the proceedings. ORDER: criminal petition disposed; proceedings in C.C.No.101/2024 stand quashed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:2426 WP No. 31655 of 2024

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 31655 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI IRFAN AHMED

¶9

S/O ZAMEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS NO.62/10, WARD NO.10 1^ST NAGARTHPET, SIDDLAGHATTA CHIKKABALLAPURA 3 562 105.

¶10

SRI IMRAN AHMED S/O ZAMEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS NO.62/10, WARD NO.10 1^ST NAGARTHPET, SIDDLAGHATTA CHIKKABALLAPURA 3 562 105.

¶11

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

¶12

SRI SIBGATH ULLA S/O SYED SAIFULLA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT KUMBARPET SIDDLAGHATTA TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA 3 562 105.

¶13

SRI MUFEEZ S/O NAZEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT ILAHI NAGAR SIDDLAGHATTA TOWN

¶14

¶15

NC: 2026:KHC:2426 WP No. 31655 of 2024

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

CHIKKABALLAPURA 3 562 105.

¶18

SMT. JOHAR FATHIMA W/O ZAMEER AHMED AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS NO.62/10, WARD NO.10 1^ST NAGARTHPET, SIDDLAGHATTA CHIKKABALLAPURA 3 562 105.

¶19

&PETITIONERS

¶20

(BY SRI RAMESHA H. E., ADVOCATE)

¶21

AND:

¶22

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SIDLAGHATTA POLICE REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶23

SRI NASEER PASHA W/O WAZEER PASHA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT 1^ST TMC LAYOUT SHIDLAGHATTA TOWN CHIKKABALLAPURA 3 562 105.

¶24

&RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI SIDDAPPA V. D., ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶26

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF THE CR.P.C., 1973 PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC.NO.101/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIDLAGHATTA PRODUCED AT ANNX-A.

¶27

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:2426 WP No. 31655 of 2024

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 8B9 GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

Petitioners 3 accused Nos.1 to 5 are before this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.101/2024, pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sidlaghatta, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 323, 324, 504, 506, and 149 of the IPC.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 in unison submit that during the pendency of these proceedings, the parties to the lis have settled their disputes amicably by compounding the offences. A joint affidavit along with a joint memo is filed before this Court to that effect.

¶35

The joint memo reads as follows:

¶36

<3. We submitted that the petitioner No.1 Imran Ahmed has filed complaint on 08.04.2024 against Respondent No.2 brother Akram Pasha (Accused No.6 in Cr. No. 40/2024). The Copy of the FIR filed by the Petitioner No.1 in Cr. No. 40/2024. The Respondent No.1 have been investigated and detailed charge sheet against Respondent No.2 brother Akram Pasha and other accused under section 143, 323, 324, 504, 506 & 149 of IPC. The

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:2426 WP No. 31655 of 2024

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Trail court taken cognizance issued summons to the accused persons. It is submitted that the Respondent No.1 filed su-moto complaint alleged that the accused persons attacked the police station and damaged public properties.

¶41

4. We submitted that petitioner has filed one more complaint in the year 2023 against Tanveer Alam and he also accused in Cr. No. 119/2023 which is pending adjudication alleged under section 323, 324, 504, 506 R/W 34 of IPC. It is further submitted that Ahle SunnathUl-Jamat Jamia Masjid (WAQF) president called meeting between Petitioner No.1 and Tanveer Alam on 25.10.2024, in that incident he seeks apology to the Petitioner No.1 and promised to withdrawn the complaint filed by himself but he did not filed any application before the court. The complaint filed by the Respondent No.2 was intention arras me and m family members. On that day members of the family sat together for dinner then they came to our home and attacked family members.

¶42

5. We submitted that the Respondent No.2/complainant has agreed to withdraw the allegation made in the complaint and also the petitioners are also agreed to withdraw the counter complaints. The petitioners have filed complaint in CR No. 40/2024, 41/2024 and 47/2024 against Respondent No.2 and his brother Akram Pasha, Syed Khwaja which are pending before the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Sidlaghatta, Chikkaballapura.

¶43

WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court be pleased pass an appropriate order of acquitting the petitioners in the interest of justice.=

¶44

Though the offences alleged against the petitioners in the case at hand inter alia are the ones punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC, which are non-cognizable offences, since it is a dispute between the parties and the allegations are

¶45

¶46

NC: 2026:KHC:2426 WP No. 31655 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

not against the State, I deem it appropriate to accept the joint memo and the joint affidavit and terminate the proceedings against the petitioners.

¶49