Karnataka High Court
CRL.P/5703/2019 of MR. JAISHANKAR Vs MR. SURESH KALIDAS NAIR on 7 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010409112019 NC: 2026:KHC:48415 CRL.P No. 5703 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5703 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. MR. JAISHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O MR.
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5703 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
1.
MR. JAISHANKAR,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
S/O MR. LAKSHMINARAYAN A.B.,
RESIDING AT D.701,
PURVA PARK, COX TOWN,
BENGALURU - 560 005.
PRESENTLY AT THIS ADDRESS
EARLIER AT: FLAT NO.209,
SECOND FLOOR, ‘PURVA CARNATION’,
COX TOWN, BENGALURU-560005.
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. B.R. DHANALAKSHMI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. NAVKESH BATRA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
MR. SURESH KALIDAS NAIR,
S/O LATE MR. K. KALIDAS,
PERMANENT RESIDENT OF ‘AISHWARYA’,
AMBADI LANE, AYYANTHOLE,
TRISSUR, KERALA STATE.
AND AT FLAT 83,
AL MUSALLA TOWER,
BANK STREET, PO 50251
DUBAI, UAE.
Digitally signed
by DEVIKA M
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
REPRESENTED BY HIS
GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
GROUP CAPTAIN NANDAKUMAR NAIR,
S/O LATE MR. K. KALIDAS,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
RESIDING AT P-8/4,
VISHWA VIHAR ASTE OFFICERS ENCLAVE,
C.V.RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GANESH BHAT Y.H., ADVOCATE - ABSENT)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
08.02.2017,
(ANNEXURE-1
HERETO)
PASSED
IN
C.C.NO.8806/2017 (PCR NO.4285/2015) PENDING ON THE
FILE OF THE 4TH A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU, IN SO FAR AS THE
PETITIONER
IS
CONCERNED
AND
TO
QUASH
THE
PROCEEDINGS
IN
C.C.NO.8806/2017
(PCR
4285/2015)
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 4TH A.C.M.M., AT BENGALURU
(ANNEXURE-1 HERETO) IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS
CONCERNED.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING 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 for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent is absent.
2. The prayer sought in the petition is to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner herein, as he was arrayed as accused No.5 in the private complaint
HC-KAR
and cognizance was taken and case is numbered as C.C.No.8806/2017.
3. The learned coun for the petitioner would submit that the complaint ex-facie discloses landlord tenant dispute between the complainant and M/s. Gateway IT and Travel Solutions Pvt. Ltd. under the leave and licence agreement dated 30.05.2013, which is the subject matter of the complaint. It is also contended that there was a civil suit in O.S.No.1140/2014 against the licensee company and there was a decree and execution petition was also filed in Ex.P.No.3187/2014 and execution was closed as fully satisfied as the complainant landlord/respondent took possession of the premises. It is contended that with fraudulent intention the complainant landlord has filed a false and frivolous complaint against the petitioner and continuing to prosecute in a false case. It is contended that the petitioner is only an employee of M/s. Gateway IT and Travel Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and he was not a party to the leave and license as well as in the
HC-KAR
original suit and also in the execution petition. It is also contended that the petitioner was removed from service and even not paid the salary and also the back wages. Hence, prayed this Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the material available on record, in the complaint a specific allegation is made that there was a leave and license agreement between the complainant and accused Nos.1 to 4. An allegation is made that along with accused Nos.1 to 4, this petitioner is also squatting on the property. But the material is very clear that possession was already delivered in favour of the complainant in 2016 itself and this petitioner is not in occupation of the premises. The learned counsel would submit that this petitioner is already removed from service and he is not squatting on the property.
HC-KAR
5. Having taken note of the said fact into consideration and as the order sheet discloses that in the execution petition, possession was already delivered, the question of continuing the criminal prosecution against this petitioner does not arise and it is a fit case to quash the proceedings in respect of the petitioner is concerned. Hence, the initiation of criminal proceedings against this petitioner is quashed.
Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE
MD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41