CRL.P/8654/2026 of SRI CHANDRU Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 25 September 2026

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner is before the Court seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No.0100 of 2026 pending on the file of Principal District

HC-KAR

and Sessions Court, Chamarajanagara District registered for offences punishable under Sections 299, 324(4) of BNS, 2023 and under Section 3(1)(t) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

2. Heard Sri Narendra Babu H.L, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned State Public Prosecutor-1 appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri Prasanna Kumar B, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

3. This Court, owing to the magnitude of the problem as projected by the petitioner, had passed slew of orders. The orders would read as follows: On 19.06.2026: “Learned HCGP is directed to accept notice for respondent No.1. Further investigation/proceedings in Crime No.100/2026 pending before the Principal District and Sessions Court, Chamarajanagara District, Chamarajanagar, qua the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing. List this matter on 24.06.2026 in the 'fresh matters list'.”

HC-KAR

On 24.06.2026: “Learned SPP submits that there are cases registered against the complainant and against the petitioner. Therefore, in the light of both these cases and the Investigating Officer being common, if investigation would be permitted, it would be arriving at the truth of the matter, as there are allegations and contra-allegations by the petitioner and against the petitioner. In the light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to permit investigation into the matter both in the crime registered against the petitioner or in the crime registered against the complainant. Therefore, in the garb of investigation, the police shall not harass or take coercive steps against the petitioner. The report of investigation be placed before the Court by the next date. The petitioner is at liberty to move the matter in the event the police would deviate what is observed at the hands of this Court, i.e., harassment or taking coercive steps. The investigating officers shall not come in the way of the necessity of any medical treatment for the petitioner. List the matter on 30.07.2026, in the 'fresh matters list'. The interim order granted earlier is extended till the next date of hearing.”

On 30.07.2026: “Office objection qua maintainability stands overruled. Heard Sri Punith M., learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Public Prosecutor – 1 appearing for respondent No.1 – State and the learned counsel for the complainant.

HC-KAR

The case at hand depicts an appalling circumstance of the act allegedly done by the petitioners wherein, a man striped naked is tied to the stone pillar and is beaten by several people on the score of cow dung thrown at the image of a particular person. The photographs appended to the petition would demonstrate apathy or anarchy, apathy for the reason that a man who is of unsound mind, owing to his mental instability had thrown dung over the image of the said person. Anarchy for the reason that the police instead of taking action against the perpetrators, who allegedly beat the said person who was tied to the stone pillar appease the persons who have beaten or allegedly beaten the said person so tied. On the said incident, the petitioners have registered a crime, the complainant has registered a crime. Therefore, it is a case and a counter case. Owing to the seriousness of the allegation in both the cases, there cannot be any interdiction of the proceedings. Investigation in the least is a must. Therefore, the learned SPP shall place on record the papers of investigation conducted till the next date of hearing. In the garb of investigation, no coercive steps be taken against the accused in each of the cases, subject to the condition that the accused would co-operate with the investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo indicating about 100 names of persons who are allegedly involved in the aforesaid act. The Investigating Officer shall also look into the role of those persons as is produced before the Court and the copy is handed over to the learned State Public Prosecutor - 1. Heard in part. List this matter on 20.08.2026 at 3.30 p.m. for further hearing.”

HC-KAR

On 20.08.2026 "xxxxxx

It is clarified that the interim order would operate only against the petitioner - Chandru and it is made clear that there is no interim order in favour of other accused.

All the other accused shall co-operate with the investigation.

The report of the investigation be placed before this Court upto the date that it is conducted on the next date of hearing.

List the matter on 02.09.2026, at 4.00 p.m. for further hearing.”

On 02.09.2026 "xxxxxx The matter was already posted for further hearing in terms of the afore-quoted orders. In that light, list the matter on 25.09.2026, for further hearing. Interim order granted earlier, in the manner it is subsisting, is extended till the next date of hearing.”

4. The learned State Public Prosecutor-1, now on instructions and production of records, would submit that the police have filed a ‘B’ report against the present petitioner and charge sheet against 20 other accused who are named therein.

HC-KAR

5. In the light of filing of the ‘B’ report against the petitioner, the petition in the form that it is presented is rendered infructuous.

6. In view of the magnitude of the problem that is captured in the orders quoted hereinabove, the charge sheet against the other accused be placed before the concerned Court by the Station House Officer, without brooking any delay.

Leaving open all the remedy available to the petitioner or knocking at the doors of this Court in the event of need in future, the petition stands disposed.

Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25