Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/8434/2019 of SRI PARTHINATHAN Vs STATE BY on 10 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010530412019 NC: 2026:KHC:49198 CRL.P No. 8434 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8434 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. SRI. PARTHINATHAN S/O SRI. STEPHEN AGED ABOUT 52
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8434 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. PARTHINATHAN
S/O SRI. STEPHEN
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT NO.13, 16TH CROSS
NEAR STEPHEN SCHOOL
KAMMAGONDANAHALLI
BENGALURU.
2.
SMT. SOWMYANAYAKI
W/O SRI C.P.NARAYANARAO
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS
R/A NO.22, WARD NO.12
KAMMAGONDANAHALLI
JALAHALLI WEST
BENGALURU.
…PETITIONERS
(BY KUMARI. CHETHANA MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. B.S. MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
STATE BY
STATION HOUSE OFFICER (INCHARGE)
GANGAMMANAGUDI POLICE
YESHWANTHAPURA SUB-DIVISION
BENGALURU.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
2.
JACOB UMMAN
GPA HOLDER OF ABRAHAN UMMAN
S/O K.C.UMMAN
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
NO.117, 5TH MAIN ROAD
MATHIKERE EXTENSION
BENGALURU-560 054.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MOHAMMED AYUB ALI, ADDL. SPP FOR R1; SRI. ROHAN S., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. M.R.BALAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.PC PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.10676/2018 IN CR.NO.185/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE
1ST A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU.
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 learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Additional SPP for respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners would submit that accused Nos.3 and 6 are innocent and accused No.6 is the purchaser of the property having paid the sale consideration and she was not having any knowledge about
HC-KAR
earlier dispute and there cannot be any criminal prosecution against accused No.6, who had purchased the property by paying the sale consideration. The counsel also would contend that in respect of accused No.3 is concerned, this Court considering the order passed in Crl.P.No.1808/2019 dated 07.04.2016, wherein a similar acquisition was made in Crl.P.No.8469/2019 vide order dated 24.06.2026 quashed the proceedings on the ground that, so far as accused Nos.3 and 6 are concerned, similar allegations were made and without any overt acts. Hence, the accused No.3 is also entitled for the same benefit in view of quashing of proceedings against accused No.3 in a similar set of facts.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-complainant brought to notice of this Court that in the complaint at page No.16, an allegation is made against accused Nos.2 and 4 that this accused No.3 also joined hands along with others taking advantage of the interim order and particularly in respect of Sy.No.2 is concerned, created the documents and sold the property in favour of accused No.6 vide
HC-KAR
sale deed dated 28.06.2014. Hence, there is a clear role on the part of accused No.3.
4. Learned Additional SPP appearing for respondent No.1 would contend that specific allegations are made with regard to creation of documents and sale of property. He also further submit that C.W.8 made the statement regarding creation of documents.
5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for petitioners, learned Additional SPP appearing for respondent No.1 and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2- complainant and considering the reasoned order passed in Crl.P.No.1808/2019 dated 07.04.2026 in respect of accused No.4-S.N.Prakash is concerned quashing the same and similar allegation is also made against accused No.3 and when similar allegation is made against accused No.3 as well, the accused No.3 is also entitled for the same benefit and based on the said reasoning in Crl.P.No.8469/2019 dated 24.06.2026 also, this Court, in respect of accused No.3 is concerned, extended the very same benefit. When such being the material available on record and this Court has already considered the petition under
HC-KAR
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in respect of accused No.3 and accused No.6 is the purchaser, who had purchased the property by making payment of sale consideration. Hence, there cannot be any criminal prosecution. The allegation is in respect of accused No.4, who had indulged in creation of documents and selling the property to accused No.6, but no material that accused No.6 had knowledge about the same. Hence, the petitioners, who are accused Nos.3 and 6 have also made out a case to quash the proceedings and they are entitled for the similar benefit. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed.
(ii) The proceedings initiated against accused Nos.3 and 6 in C.C.No.10676/2018 in Crime No.185/2014, is hereby quashed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19