Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/7681/2019 of MR. AMARENDRA SAHU Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 17 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010484592019 NC: 2026:KHC:50933 CRL.P No. 7882 of 2019 C/W CRL.P No. 7681 of 2019 CRL.P No. 8399 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7882 OF 2019 (482(Cr.PC) /
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7882 OF 2019 (482(Cr.PC) /
528(BNSS))
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7681 OF 2019 (482(Cr.PC) /
528(BNSS))
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 8399 OF 2019 (482(Cr.PC) /
528(BNSS))
IN CRL.P No. 7882/2019
BETWEEN:
NILADRI MUKHOPADHYAY
S/O NILRATAN MUKHOPADHYAY
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/O FLAT C, 25/F.
BIRCHWOOD PLACE, 96,
MACDONNELL ROAD,
CENTRAL, HONG KONG.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHINMAY J MIRJI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
HSR LAYOUT POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU
REP. BY THE OFFICE OF
THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2.
MR. M.R. RAGHAVENDRA
S/O M. RAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
NO.26/10, 6TH CROSS,
RAMANNA COMPOUND,
MANGAMMANAPALYA MAIN RAOD,
BANGALORE-560 068.
INDIA.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUHAS GOWDA M., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SRINIVASA C., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH
THE COMPLAINT DATED 04.10.2019, VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND
THE FIR CR.NO.324/2019 REGISTERED ON 12.10.2019 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AGAINST THE PETITIONER
FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 420 OF IPC, ANNEXURE A AND B, PENDING BEFORE THE VI A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU.
IN CRL.P NO. 7681/2019
BETWEEN:
MR. AMARENDRA SAHU
S/O. ANAND CHANDR SAHU,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/O. NO. S-25, 1ST LANE,
HAL CENTRAL TOWNSHIP,
BEHIND HAL MARATHALLI COLONY,
BANGALORE-560 037,
INDIA.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHINMAY J MIRJI.,ADVOCATE)
HC-KAR
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
HSR LAYOUT POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY THE OFFICE OF
THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF BUILDING
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2.
MR. M. R. RAGHAVENDRA
NO.26/10, 6TH CROSS,
RAMMANA COMPOUND,
MANGAMMANAPALYA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 068,
INDIA.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUHAS GOWDA M., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SRINIVASA C., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH
THE
ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST
THE
PETITIONER IN COMPLAINT DATED 04.10.2019 VIDE
ANNEXURE-B
AND
THE
FIR
IN
CR.NO.324/2019
REGISTERED
ON
12.10.2019
VIDE
ANNEXURE-A
BY
RESPONDENT NO.1 AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 420 OF IPC, ANNEXURE A AND B, PENDING
ON THE FILE OF VI ADDL.C.M.M., BENGALURU.
IN CRL.P NO. 8399/2019
BETWEEN:
KARTHIK PRABHAKAR
S/O LATE PRABHAKAR,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/A NO.18, 15TH CROSS,
RING ROAD, 4TH PHASE,
J P NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 078.
HC-KAR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SYED AQDUS.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY H S R LAYOUT POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY S.P.P.,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA COMPLEX,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2.
M R RAGHAVENDRA
S/O M RAMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/A NO.26/10, 6TH CROSS,
RAMANNA COMPOUND,
MANGAMMANAPALYA MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 068.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUHAS GOWDA M., HCGP FOR R1;
SRI. SRINIVASA C., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH
THE FIR DATED 12.10.2019 IN CRIME NO.324/2019 ARISING
OUT OF THE COMPLAINT, DATED 04.10.2019 FILED BEFORE
THE RESPONDENT POLICE STATION, AND THE RESULTANT
INVESTIGATION
PENDING
OF
THE
FILE
OF
THE
VI
ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU
BOTH OF WHICH ARE ANNEXED HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-A
AND ANNEXURE-B FOR AND OFFENCE P/U/S.420 OF IPC,
1860.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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 petitioners and also learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents, including the counsel appearing for the State.
2. The Petitioners are accused No.1 to 3 in Crime No.324/2019, registered by respondent-HSR Layout Police Station. They prayed this Court to quash the proceedings initiated against them for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the complaint at Annexure-B does not constitute any ingredients of the offence under Section 420 of IPC. It is only a dispute with regard to the payment of amount.
HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court to the contents of complaint wherein prayer is also sought for to instruct the accused to pay the amount with interest. The police have registered the case for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC.
5. Learned counsel would contend that with regard to liability is concerned, it is civil in nature and hence, it is governed by exercise of powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant /respondent No.2 would contend that, there is a clear understanding between the parties and also it is agreed to pay the amount of Rs.1,74,800/- per month as rent within 5th date of next month, but the same was not paid for a period of 31 months and only a part-payment out of the total amount due for payment is Rs.46,97,705/-, is paid and hence, complaint is filed.
HC-KAR
7. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1-State would submit that there was a promise to make the payment, but payment was not made, as such, FIR is registered.
8. Having heard the petitioner's counsel and also the learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents, including the counsel appearing for the State and also having perused the contents of the complaint, it is very clear that, it is a dispute with regard to the arrears of rent payable by the tenant and also having considered the complaint, the averment is also very clear that only relief is sought by the complainant is to instruct Nestaway and its Directors to pay the amount due to the complainant with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. When such claim is sought, the police have registered the criminal case noting the offence under Section 420 of IPC. It is nothing, but an abuse of process of law.
HC-KAR
9. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dineshbhai Patel v. State of Gujarat and others reported in (2018) 3 SCC 104, has held that only the proceedings can be initiated if the complaint discloses committing of an offence, or otherwise, there is no need to investigate the same. In the aforecited judgment, it is categorically held that, if allegation is made in the complaint which constitutes an offence, then only the police can investigate the matter and unearth the truth by investigating it. But, here is not a case for registering the criminal case and investigating the matter and hence, the registration of the case is nothing, but an abuse of process of law, which leads to miscarriage of justice.
10. In view of the discussions made above, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Criminal petition is allowed.
HC-KAR
(ii) The initiation of proceedings against the
petitioners / Accused No.1 to 3 are
hereby quashed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20