BENGALURU-560 001 v. SRI. HARSHA.G, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

(BY SMT. K K THAYAMMA, ADVOCATE) AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA CHANDRASHEKARAPURA POLICE, GUBBI CIRCLE, GUBBI, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 213 REP. BY SPP, BENGALURU-560 001. …PETITIONER Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

NALINA W/O SHIVAKUMAR, AGED 36 YEARS, IDAGURU VILLAGE, C.S.PURA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK-572 213. (BY SMT. SOWMYA.R, HCGP FOR R-1 SRI. HARSHA.G, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR FILED IN CR.NO.104/2024 BY THE CHANDRASHEKARAPURA POLICE, GUBBI U/S 288, 125(b) OF BNS AND SEC. 3 OF THE EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT AGAINST THE PETITIONER PENDING BEFORE THE ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, GUBBI, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:26763 CRL.P No. 3619 of 2025 HC-KAR CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following relief:

Wherefore, the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the F.I.R. filed in Crime No. 104/2024 by the Chandrashekara Pura Police, Gubbi under Sections 288, 125(b) of B.N.S. 2023 and Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act against the petitioner pending before the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC(Jr. Dn), Gubbi Tumakuru District in the interest of justice

.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the 1strespondent as well as learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and perused the material on record.

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the 2nd respondent – complainant filed the impugned complaint dated

09.10.2024 against unknown persons registered as FIR in Crime No.104/2024 for offences punishable under Sections 288 and 125(b) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3 of the Explosives Substances Act, 1908. The said complaint reads as under:- “ ZÀAzÀæ±ÉÃRgÀ¥ÀÄgÀ ¥ÉÆð¸ï oÁuÉ C¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ, £À½£À, PÉÆÃA ²ªÀPÀĪÀiÁgï, ªÀµÀð 36, MPÀÌ°UÉ d£ÁAUÀ, UÀÈ»tÂ, EqÀUÀÆgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄ, ¹.J¸ï.¥ÀÄgÀ, ºÉÆç½, UÀÄ©â vÁ: DzÀ £Á£ÀÄ ¤ÃrzÀ zÀÆgÀÄ. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:26763 CRL.P No. 3619 of 2025 HC-KAR K£ÉAzÀgÉ, £À£Àß ªÀÄUÀ ªÉÆäµïUËqÀ gÀªÀgÀÄ EzÉà EqÀUÀÆgÀÄ UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj ¥ËæqsÀ±Á¯ÉAiÀÄ°è 10£Éà vÀgÀUÀwAiÀÄ°è NzÀÄwÛgÀÄvÁÛ£É. JA¢£ÀAvÉ F ¢£À

09.10.2024 gÀ ¨É½UÉÎ 8.45 UÀAmÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀģɬÄAzÀ ±Á¯ÉUÉ ºÉÆÃzÀ£ÀÄ. CªÀ£ÀÄ ¸ÀÆ̯ïUÉ ºÉÆÃzÀ CzsÀð UÀAmÉ vÀgÀĪÁAiÀÄ CªÀ£À eÉÆvÉ ºÉÆÃVzÀÝ ªÉƤµï£À ¸ÉßûvÀ ±ÀgÀvï E§âgÀÄ ªÁ¥À¸ï ªÀÄ£ÉUÉ §AzÀgÀÄ. DUÀ ±ÀgÀvÀ£ÀÄ ±Á¯ÉAiÀÄ ¥ÀPÀÌzÀ PÁA¥ËAqï §½ ¸ÀÄj¢zÀÝ §AqÉ PÀ°è£À°èzÀÝ ¸ÀtÚ d°èAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä vÀAw gÀÆ¥ÀzÀ°èzÀÝ ªÉÊgï ºÁUÀÆ CzÀPÉÌ CAnzÀAwzÀÝ ¨Áålj ±À¯ï£ÀAwzÀÝ ©½ §tÚzÀ ªÀ¸ÀÄÛªÀ£ÀÄß vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ ±Á¯É §½ ºÉÆÃUÀÄwÛzÀÝAvÉ D ªÀ¸ÀÄÛªÀÅ ¹rzÀÄ ªÉÆäµï£À §®UÉÊ£À ºÉ¨ÉâgÀ¼ÀÄ, vÉÆÃgÀÄ ¨ÉgÀ¼ÀÄ, ªÀÄzÀåzsÀ ¨ÉgÀ½UÉ ¥ÉmÁÖV czÀæUÉÆAqÀÄ gÀPÀÛ §gÀÄwÛvÀÄÛ. vÀPÀët £ÁªÀÅ EqÀUÀÆj¤AzÀ ºÉ§ÆâjUÉ ¨ÉÊPÀ°è §AzÀÄ ºÉ§Æâj¤AzÀ 108 DA§Ä¯É£ïì£À°è vÀĪÀÄPÀÆj£À UÀAUÁ D¸ÀàvÉæ, ²gÁ gÀ¸ÉÛ, vÀĪÀÄPÀÆgÀÄ E°èUÉ PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃV aQvÉì PÉÆr¹zɪÀÅ. F WÀl£ÉAiÀÄ §UÉÎ «ZÁgÀ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁV AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÆà PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä £ÀªÀÄÆäj£À ¸ÀPÁðj ±Á¯ÉAiÀÄ PÁA¥ËAqï §½AiÀÄ°è §AqÉ PÀ®ÄèUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀÄj¢zÀÄÝ §AqÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¹r¹ ¨ÉÆæÃqÉ£ï PÀ®ÄèUÀ½UÁV ¥ÀjªÀwð¸À®Ä AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÆà ¸ÉÆàÃlPÀ ªÀ¸ÀÄÛUÀ¼À£ÀÄß §¼À¹ CzÀÄ ¸ÉÆéÃlUÉƼÀîzÉà ºÁUÉAiÉÄà G½¢zÀÝ£ÀÄß ±Á¯ÉAiÀÄ §½ ¸ÀÄj¢zÀÄÝ, £À£Àß ªÀÄUÀ£ÀÄ CzÀÄ ¸ÉÆéÃlPÀªÉAzÀÄ w½AiÀÄzÉà DlzÀ ªÀ¸ÀÄÛªÉAzÀÄ w½zÀÄ PÉÊUÉwÛPÉÆAqÁUÀ ¸ÉÆéÃlUÉÆAqÀÄ £À£Àß ªÀÄUÀ£À §®UÉÊ ºÉ¨ÉâgÀ¼ÀÄ, vÉÆÃgÀÄ ¨ÉgÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÀÄzÀåzÀ ¨ÉgÀ¼ÀÄ czÀæUÉÆArgÀÄvÉÛ. DzÀÝjAzÀ vÁªÀÅ ¸ÀܼÀ vÀ¤SÉ ªÀiÁr WÀl£ÉUÉ PÁgÀtgÁzÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀvÉÛ ªÀiÁr CªÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¹ £À£Àß ªÀÄUÀ¤UÉ £ÁåAiÀÄ PÉÆr¸À¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉýPÉÆüÀÄîvÉÛãÉ. F §AqÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬ÄÛ PÀqɬÄAzÀ ¸ÀÆÌ°£À PÉ®¸ÀPÉÌ vÀj¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉAzÀÄ w½¢gÀÄvÉÛ. UÁæªÀÄ ¥ÀAZÁ¬ÄÛ ¦.r.N gÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÀgɹ vÀ¤SÉ ªÀiÁr £ÁåAiÀÄ PÉÆr¸À¨ÉÃPÁV «£ÀAw F ¢£À £À£Àß ªÀÄUÀ£À PÉÊ §gɼÀ ±À¸ÀÛç aQvÉì DVzÀÄÝ oÁuÉUÉ §AzsÀÆ zÀÆgÀÄ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¸ÁzsÀåªÁUÀzÀ PÁgÀt £Á£ÀÄ ¤ÃqÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ F zÀÆj£À ªÉÄÃ¯É PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À¨ÉÃPÉAzÀÄ PÉÆÃgÀÄvÉÛãÉ.”

In pursuance of the same, during the course of investigation, the 1st respondent – police authorities recorded the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:26763 CRL.P No. 3619 of 2025 HC-KAR sworn statement of accused No.3 – K.Manjunatha, who is alleged to have informed that he had purchased explosives in question from the petitioner and accordingly, he is arraigned as accused No.5 in the proceedings. In this context, it is well settled that the petitioner cannot be arrayed as co-accused on the basis of sole confessional statement / statement of the co-accused as held by the Apex Court and this Court in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamilnadu - (2021) 4 SCC 1 and Balwinder Singh (Binda) vs. Narcotics Control Bureau - 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1213. It is also relevant to state that apart from the aforesaid alleged confessional statement / sole statement of the co-accused i.e., accused No.3, no other material is produced by the 1st respondent – Police to establish the commission of the alleged offences by the petitioner or that the petitioner supplied the explosives in question to accused No.3. Under these circumstances, the continuation of impugned proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of process of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:26763 CRL.P No. 3619 of 2025 HC-KAR