Judgment · High Court

(BY SRI. C.H. JADHAV, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. AVISHKAR T., ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER NO.1; SRI. KIRAN S. JAVALI, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI SHASHWATH S. PRAKASH, SRI. SAMIT PARVATIKAR AND SRI. PAVAN R. JAVALI, ADVOCATES FOR PETITIONER NOS.2 TO 5.) AND:

#1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY AVALAHALLY POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER HIGH COURT BUILDING BANGALORE-560001.

#2. VENKATAPPA K. S/O LATE KRISHNAN AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER OF SMT. RADHA, NO.396, 4TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, 1ST STAGE, HBR LAYOUT BANGALORE-560043. …RESPONDENTS HC-KAR - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESHA, SPP-1 ALONG WITH SRI. CHANNAPPA ERAPPA, HCGP., FOR R.1; SRI. VENKATESH P. DALWAI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRASHANTH M.V., ADVOCATE FOR R.2.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 528 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGRIK SURAKSHA SANHITHA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR DATED 22.10.2025 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT-1 POLICE IN CRIME NO.446/2025, FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 3(5), 335, 335(A)(iii), 337, 339, 340, 341, 323, 324, 329, 126, 351(1), 351(2), 351(4), 240, 242, 246, 314, 318, 319, 322 AND 308 OF THE BHARATIYA NAGRIK SURAKSHA SANHITA-BNS MARKED AS ANNEXURE-B, PETITIONERS CONCERNED ONLY, ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: HC-KAR - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER

#1. The present petition is filed with the following prayers: "a) Call for entire records; b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the FIR dated 22/10/2025 registered by the Respondent-1 police in Crime No.446/2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 335, 335(A)(iii), 337, 339, 340, 341, 323, 324, 329, 126, 351(1), 351(2), 351(4), 240, 242, 246, 314, 318, 319, 322 and 308 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita-BNS marked as-Annexure-B, petitioners concerned only. c) Pass any other appropriate order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

#2. Respondent no.2 lodged a complaint with respondent no.1-Police stating that the property, which is the subject matter of the petition, was owned by one S.Krishnan and that the Complainant (Smt. R.Radha) is his widow. That petitioner no.2 as an impostor tried to show herself as the widow of late S.Krishnan and petitioner Nos.3, 4 and 5 falsely tried to show HC-KAR - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 themselves as the children of late S.Krishnan. By doing so, they tried to knock away the precious immovable property, which is the subject matter of the writ petition. In this regard, they have entered into a Joint Development Agreement and executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of petitioner no.1, who also connived and helped petitioner Nos.2 to 5 to depict themselves falsely as legal representatives of late S.Krishnan. Based on the said complaint, investigation was taken up by respondent no.1- Police and FIR was registered and Crime No.446/2025 came into existence and the same is pending on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru Rural District. This Act of the State has been challenged by filing the instant petition by the petitioners.

#3. The case of the petitioners is that petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are not impostors and they are the genuine legal representatives of the deceased S.Krishnan and that petitioner no.2 is his widow. It is their case that respondent no.2 is the impostor. It is further submitted that petitioner Nos.2 to 5, with a view to develop their property, entered into a Joint Development Agreement with the Company belonging to petitioner no.1 and HC-KAR - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 that petitioner no.1 is only a Developer of the property and he has not been involved with the property in any other capacity whatsoever. That the present proceedings are initiated by respondent No.2 with a view to knock off the valuable property, which is the subject matter of the writ petition, which actually belongs to petitioner nos.2 to 5.

#4. Based on the pleadings made by the petitioners and the documents produced, this Court, on 27.11.2025, has passed the following order: "Learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent No.1. Issue emergent notice respondent No.2, returnable by 08.12.2025. The averments made in the complaint and the FIR reveal that there is a dispute pertaining to certain properties between the complainant / respondent No.2 and the petitioners herein and civil suits are pending in this regard. In the meanwhile, respondent No.2 has alleged forgery, cheating, impersonation and other offences as against the petitioners and the FIR has been registered against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 3(5), 335, 335(A)(iii), 337, 339, 340, 341, 323, 324, 329, 126, 351(1), 351(2), 351(4), 240, 242, 246, 314, 318, 319, 322 and 308 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. HC-KAR - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025

#2. It is seen that the dispute between the petitioners and respondent No.2 is purely civil in nature. The case of the petitioners is that respondent No.2 is trying to arm-twist the petitioners by trying to initiate criminal proceedings.

#3. Hence the following: ORDER i. Respondent No.1 shall not initiate any coercive steps against the petitioners. ii. The petitioners shall cooperate with the investigation. iii. The parties are given liberty to seek modification of this order. iv. Call on 08.12.2025."

#5. The State has subsequently taken up the investigation and the petitioners are said to have co-operated with the State during the investigation. In the meanwhile, two different sets of persons, also claiming to be the legal representatives of the deceased Krishnan have made a claim to the property concerned and the State has investigated into the affairs of respondent no.2 and the other two sets of persons claiming to be the legal representatives of late S.Krishnan. The HC-KAR - 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 investigation by the State resulted in Criminal Petition No.15776/2025 and Criminal Petition No.16398/2025 being filed by the other two sets of persons, who claim to be the legal representatives of the deceased S.Krishnan and the said criminal petitions came to be rejected. An appeal to the Apex Court was filed against the order passed in criminal petition No.15776/2025, which came to be dismissed. When the aforementioned criminal petitions were rejected by this Court the Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3108/2026 was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, the investigation into the complaint filed by respondent no.2 herein was not yet completed by respondent no.1-Police. Thereafter, respondent no.1-Police has completed the investigation and has submitted the FSL report and the report pertaining to investigation before this Court in a sealed cover on 24.07.2006. The same has been perused.

#6. The submission of the learned SPP-I appearing for respondent No.1 is that the investigation is completed by respondent No.1 and they have found that the petitioners herein are innocent of the allegations made against them. HC-KAR - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 After the investigation, the State is of the opinion that petitioner no.2 is the legally wedded wife of late S. Krishnan, who owned the property and petitioner nos.3, 4 and 5 are their children. That petitioner no.1, who represents a limited Company, got a Joint Development Agreement and the General Power of Attorney executed from petitioner Nos.2 to 5 to develop the property, which is the subject matter of the writ petition and that he had no role in executing any other documents pertaining to the ownership of the property. It is further submitted that respondent No.2/Complainant is an impostor and her original name is not Radha, but Chaitra and that she has tried to knock off the valuable immovable property, which is the subject matter of the writ petition and the State intends to prosecute her along with such other persons, as may be required in law. It is also submitted that 'B' report in respect of the petitioners is kept ready and the same will be filed before the learned Magistrate.

#7. However, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 reiterates that the second respondent is the true Radha and the averments made in the complaint are true and prays HC-KAR - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 that he may be given an opportunity to file a protest petition to the 'B' report, which the State intends to file before the learned Magistrate.

#8. Under the circumstances, it has to be concluded that innocence of the petitioners is established and the State is required to proceed against respondent no.2.

#9. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Respondent-State is directed to file the 'B' report as indicated by them in Crime No.446/2025 insofar as it relates to the petitioners herein are concerned before the concerned Magistrate; (ii) Upon receipt of the same, the trial court shall process the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereafter; (iii) If the petitioners were to file an application before return of documents/title deeds produced by them during investigation, appropriate orders will be passed by the trial court; HC-KAR - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:40521 WP No. 34562 of 2025 CNR: KAHC010750262025 (iv) Respondent-State is also directed to initiate appropriate proceedings against respondent no.2 and such other persons in the manner known to law; (v) It is needless to state that upon initiation of such proceedings, respondent no.2 has liberty to defend herself in the manner known to law; (vi) The documents produced by the learned SPP-I in a sealed cover shall be returned back to him forthwith; (vii) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60