Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/9944/2026 of SRI TEJAS A Vs SRI DINESH GUNDU RAO on 1 October 2026
CNR: KAHC010462692026 NC: 2026:KHC:54868 CRL.P No. 9944 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9944 OF 2026 BETWEEN: SRI TEJAS A S/O APPAJI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9944 OF 2026
BETWEEN:
SRI TEJAS A
S/O APPAJI
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
R/AT NO.288, 2ND B MAIN
VENKAT REDDY NAGAR
JAYANAGAR, 1ST BLOCK
BENGALURU- 560011
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. DALWAI VENKATESH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI DINESH GUNDU RAO
S/O LATE R GUNDU RAO
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT NO.116, CROSS,
3RD MAIN ROAD,
RMV 2ND STAGE,
HIG COLONY,
BENGALURU-560094.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. LATHA S SHETTY.,ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528
BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING
THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET
ASIDE THAT PORTION OF THE ORDER DATED 27.06.2026
PASSED IN PCR NO.18986/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A WHEREBY
THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST RESPONDENT/ACCUSED NO.2
WERE DROPPED ON THE FILE OF THE XLII A.C.J.M BENGALURU
SPL.COURT FOR TRIAL OF CASES AGAINST MPs/MLAs IN
KARNATAKA., AND ETC.
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is challengin the order passed by the Magistrate dismissing the complaint against accused No.2.
3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that cognizance is taken against accused No.1 and 3 and absolutely there was no reason to dismiss the proceeding against the accused No.2. It is also submitted that, the petitioner has sought a further direction to the Magistrate to take cognizance against accused No.2. Thus, it is urged that the impugned order cannot be questioned before the jurisdictional Sessions Court and the present petition is the only appropriate remedy.
HC-KAR
4. The Court is of the view that the impugned order dismissing the petition against accused No.2 cannot be construed as an interlocutory order, and the said order is also amenable to the jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. In case the jurisdictional Sessions Court finds that the impugned order is erroneous and deems it appropriate to set-aside on the premise that there should be a further proceeding against accused No.2, then it is certainly within the scope and jurisdiction of the Sessions Court to direct the jurisdictional Magistrate to proceed further in accordance with law, after setting aside the impugned order.
6. That being the position, the Court is of the view that the petitioner has an equally efficacious remedy before the Sessions Court.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.
8. It is made clear that nothing is expressed on the merits of the case.
HC-KAR
9. All contentions are kept open.
(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0