Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/3819/2019 of SRI V RAMAIAH Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA on 11 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010151272019 NC: 2026:KHC:49728 CRL.P No. 3819 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3819 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. V. RAMAIAH S/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 80
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3819 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. V. RAMAIAH
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
2.
SRI. R. SURENDRA BABU
S/O V. RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
3.
SRI. R. ASHOK
@ ASHOK KUMAWR
S/O V. RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
4.
SRI. R. JAIPAL
S/O V. RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT NO.45,
KAGGADASAPURA VILLAGE,
C.V. RAMAN NAGAR POST
K.R. PURAM HOBLI,
BENGALURU - 560 036.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. NANJUNDA GOWDA M.R, ADVOCATE FOR P2 TO P4; VIDE ORDER DATED 09.09.2019, P1 STANDS ABATED)
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
AND:
1.
STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HIGH GROUND POLICE,
CCB, N.T. PET,
BENGALURU CITY - 560 002.
2.
SRI. B.N. NAMA GOWDA
ASST. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
C.C.B. SPECIAL SQUAD, N.T. PET,
BENGALURU - 560 002.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SUHAS GOWDA M, HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED - UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO 1.
SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 23.02.2013 BY DISCHARGING
THE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 TO 4 HEREIN IN THE ABOVE
SAID C.C.NO.10045/2011, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST
A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 470, 471, 472, 420, 167 R/W 34 OF IPC AND
SECTION 192(A) OF KARNATAKA LAND REVENUE ACT AND
ALLOW THE PETITION.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
HC-KAR
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 petitioners and also the learned counsel appearing for respondent No1-State.
2. The present petition is filed seeking the following prayer: "i) Call for L.C.R in C.C.No.10045/2011 which is pending on the file of the 1st Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (C.M.M.) at Bengaluru.
ii) Set aside the orders dated 23-02-2013 by discharging the petitioners / accused No.1 to 4 herein in the above said C.C.No.10045/2011, pending on the file of the 1st Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (C.M.M.), at Bengaluru for the offences punishable under sections 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 470, 471, 472, 420, 167 r/w 34 IPC and section 192(A) Karnataka Land Revenue Act and allow the petition.
iii) Set aside the judgment and order passed in Criminal.Rev.Pet.No.87/2013 on the file of the LXI City Civil and Sessions Judge CCH, Bengaluru and allow the petition.
iv) Pass any order/s as deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice."
HC-KAR
3. The accusation made against the accused persons is that they indulged in the commission of offences punishable under Sections 464, 465, 466, 467, 468, 470, 471, 472, 420 and 167 read with Section 34 of the IPC, as well as Section 192-A of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, by making use of forged documents for the sale of the property to the tune of Rs.45,62,00,000/-.
4. The Trial Court, while considering the application for discharge, has taken note of the aforesaid accusation and the same is also challenged before the Revisional Court, which has also considered the material on record. When such serious accusation is made, the question of entertaining the petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings does not arise, or otherwise it amounts to interfering with the order of the Trial Court and conducting a mini trial. The law is settled to that effect that there cannot be a mini trial at the time of consideration of accusation and all the grounds that
HC-KAR
have been urged could be raised during the course of trial. Hence, no ground is made out to invoke Section 482 of Cr.P.C., and accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32