Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/2645/2020 of BALACHANDRA MAHADEVA HEGDE Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 21 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010495192019 NC: 2026:KHC:51912 CRL.P No. 2645 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2645 OF 2020 BETWEEN: 1. BALACHANDRA MAHADEVA HEGDE S/O. MAHADEVA HEGDE AGED
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2645 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
1.
BALACHANDRA MAHADEVA HEGDE
S/O. MAHADEVA HEGDE
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT GADIKAI POST TARGOD
(BAIRUMBE), TALUK SIRSI,
UTTARAKANNADA-581402
2.
PRAKASH KAKAL
S/O KAKAL LAKSHMINARAYAN
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
HEGGODU POST HONNESARA,
TALUK SAGARA
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577417
3.
C. B. LAKSHMINARAYANA HEGDE
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
S/O LATE BHEEMAIAH HOUSE
NO.71, SREEDHARA KRUPA
3RD CROSS, NEAR GUJARATH BHAVAN
NEAR KUMBHAKONAM PLOT
DESHPANDE NAGAR
HUBLI
DHARWAD DISTRICT-580020
4.
SHANKARA BHAT
S/O NARAYANA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
R/AT SKANDA RESIDENCY
SHIVA NAGARA, TENKILA
NEAR BYPASS ROAD, PUTTUR
D.K. DISTRICT-674 201
[DELETED V/O DT.21.09.2026]
5.
PATTE SUBRAMANYA BHAT
S/O NARASIMHA BHAT
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
NO.1521, B CROSS
SOUTH END, JAYANAGARA 9TH BLOCK
BENGALURU-560 084
6.
CHEMBARPU H. SATYANARAYAN BHAT
S/O SATYANARAYANA BHAT
AGED MAJOR
R/AT NO.3A, MARGOSA ROAD
SANTOSH APARTMENTS
MALLESWARAM
BENGALURU-560 003
7.
K. T. MAHABALAGIRI HEGDE
S/O THIMMAPPA HEGDE
AGE MAJOR
KANDIKA VILLAGE AND POST
SAGAR TALUKA
SHIVAMOGGA-577201
8.
MAYURI GAJANANA UPADYAYA
W/O GAJANAN SUBRAMANYA UPADHYAYA
NO.19, 12TH CROSS, VIJAYANAGAR PIPELINE
NEAR TEJA HOME, VIJAYANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 023
[DELETED V/O DT.21.09.2026]
9.
SACHICHIDANANDA HEGDE
S/O VISHVESHWARA HEGDE
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
’SHAMBHAVI’, 2ND MAIN
VIDHYANAGAR MARKET
HC-KAR
YARD, SIRSI
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581401
10.
RAMACHANDRA D. S.
S/O SAMBHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
DINDINAKARU, HIREMANE POST
SAGARA TALUK
SHIMOGA-577 430
11.
RAMACHANDRA MANJUNATH ADI
S/O MANJUNATH ADI
DHARESHWARA RATHABIDI
DHARESHWARA, KUMTA TALUK
UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT-581327
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ARAVIND M NEGLUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY GIRINAGARA POLICE STATION
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU-560 001
2.
SHRI K. G. BHAT
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SHRI RAMACHANDRAPURA MATHA
GIRINAGARA, BENGALURU
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUHAS GOWDA M, HCGP FOR R1;
SRI NITYANAND BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI MANMOHAN P N, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 19.09.2019 PASSED BY THE
COURT
OF
LVI
ADDITIONAL
CHIEF
METROPOLITAN
HC-KAR
MAGISTRATE IN CR.NO.149/2019 PERMITTING REGISTRATION
OF A CASE AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
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 appearing for the respective parties.
2. The counsel appearing for the petitioners files a memo for deletion of the name of petitioner Nos.4 and 8 from the cause list since already this Court considered their petition in W.P.No.51480/2019. The counsel for the petitioners also submits that in respect of very same crime is concerned, this court in the writ petition already considered the factual aspects of the case and comes to the conclusion that the petition requires to be allowed and quashed the proceedings wherein similar grounds are also urged as that of in this petition. The counsel appearing for the respondent/complainant also not disputes the same. The counsel for the petitioners would submit that the order passed by this Court dated 24.06.2025 is also challenged before the Apex Court and the said case was
HC-KAR
also withdrawn by the complainant before the Apex Court. The said fact is also not disputed by the counsel appearing the complainant/respondent. When this Court already applied its mind and considered the grounds which have been urged and quashed the proceedings, the question of continuing the proceedings against the other petitioners also does not arise. Hence, it is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C in respect of remaining petitioners also.
3. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
The petition is allowed. The FIR in Cr.No.149/2019 of Girinagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 505, 506 and 507 of IPC is hereby quashed in respect of petitioner Nos.1 to 3, 5 to 7 and 9 to 11 is concerned.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
SN