Case Note & Summary
The writ petition was filed before the High Court of Karnataka under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash FIR No.162/2026 registered on 12-05-2026 by R.T. Nagar Police Station for offences under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, insofar as the petitioner, an advocate, was concerned. The petitioner was arrayed as accused No.4. The complainant alleged financial cheating by accused No.1 Gaurav, who allegedly took Rs.9,45,000 during 14-09-2024 to 29-04-2025 and threatened the complainant on 03-02-2026 when he demanded repayment. The complaint mentioned that accused No.1 called four to five people including the petitioner, who allegedly scolded and threatened over phone. The petitioner contended that he was contacted by his client for legal assistance when he was abused by the complainant and his friend; no transaction or overt act linked him to cheating. He argued false implication solely for professional engagement, unexplained delay of over two months after the alleged incident, and abuse of process. The State Public Prosecutor conceded that there was nothing beyond the telephonic conversation between petitioner and second respondent and left the matter to the Court. The Court examined the complaint and Section 318 BNS, noting that for Section 318(4) to apply, the foundational ingredients of Section 318(1) must exist, including a transaction between complainant and accused and dishonest intention from inception. The Court observed that the complaint contained only a bald allegation against the petitioner and that no overt act or role was attributed. The excerpt of the judgment ends before the final operative order. The Court had reserved orders on 30.07.2026 and pronounced on 05.08.2026.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Cheating - Sections 318(1) and 318(4), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Foundational Ingredients - The Court observed that an accusation under Section 318(4) requires the existence of ingredients of cheating under Section 318(1), namely a transaction between complainant and accused and dishonest intention from inception; in the present case, the complaint against the petitioner alleged no transaction or overt act, only a solitary telephonic threat, which was insufficient to constitute the offence (Para 8).
B) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Abuse of Process - Constitution of India, Article 226 read with Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 528 - The petitioner, a practicing advocate, contended that he was arraigned solely because he provided professional legal assistance to accused No.1 and that there was unexplained delay in filing the complaint; the State did not dispute the absence of material beyond the telephone call; the Court considered whether continuing criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process (Paras 1-5, 8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR in Crime No.162 of 2026 against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is liable to be quashed for lack of prima facie ingredients and abuse of process of law
Law Points
- Cheating under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- 2023 requires foundational ingredients of Section 318(1)
- including a transaction between complainant and accused and dishonest intention from inception
- bald allegation of telephonic threat is insufficient
- advocate cannot be arraigned without overt act or criminal intent
- unexplained delay in filing complaint indicates abuse of process
Case Details
2026 LawText (KAR) (08) 10
Writ Petition No. 16181 of 2026 (GM-RES)
Smt. Keerthi Krishna Reddy, Sri Charan N.S., Sri Shamanth Gowda J., Sri Shashikumar H.S., Sri B.N. Jagadeesha
State of Karnataka and Shrenik Chandrashekar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR
Remedy Sought
Petitioner seeks quashing of FIR in Crime No.162/2026 dated 12.05.2026 of R.T. Nagar Police Station for offences under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 insofar as petitioner concerned
Filing Reason
Petitioner, a practicing advocate, was arrayed as accused No.4 solely for alleged telephonic threat made while rendering legal assistance to accused No.1; no transaction or overt act attributed; complaint filed after unexplained delay of over two months
Issues
Whether the registration of FIR against the petitioner for offences under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is sustainable when no transaction or overt act is alleged against him
Whether the criminal proceedings against the petitioner amount to abuse of process of law due to false implication based solely on professional legal assistance
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel contended that the petitioner's implication is a collateral consequence of his professional engagement as an advocate; he was arraigned solely because accused No.1 sought legal assistance from him; there is no overt act, criminal intent, or participation; the complaint was filed after more than two months; the sole allegation pertains to an incident outside the period forming the substratum of the complaint; thus the proceedings are an abuse of process
State Public Prosecutor admitted that insofar as the petitioner is concerned, there is nothing beyond the telephonic conversation between petitioner and second respondent and left the decision to the Court
Ratio Decidendi
For an accusation to fall within Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the foundational ingredients of Section 318(1) must first exist, including a transaction between complainant and accused and dishonest intention from inception; a bald allegation of telephonic threat against an advocate without any underlying transaction or overt act is insufficient to constitute the offence
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner, a practicing Advocate is before the Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.162 of 2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) of the BNS, wherein he is drawn as accused No.4.
For an accusation to legitimately fall within the sweep of Section 318(4) of the BNS, the foundational ingredients of Section 318(1) of the BNS must necessarily first come into existence.
The offence of cheating is not born in abstraction; it necessarily presupposes a transaction between the complainant and the accused, coupled with a dishonest intention that permeates the transaction from its very inception.
Procedural History
On 12-05-2026, a complaint was registered by the second respondent leading to FIR in Crime No.162/2026 for offences under Sections 318(4) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arraigning the petitioner as accused No.4. Prior to this, on 02-03-2026, the second respondent and friends allegedly assaulted accused No.1, resulting in registration of FIR in Crime No.35 of 2026 against the second respondent and others under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), 352 read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on 04-03-2026. The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the FIR insofar as it concerns him. The matter was heard and reserved for orders on 30.07.2026 and pronounced on 05.08.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: 318(4), 351(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 352, 3(5), 318(1)
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: 528
- Constitution of India: 226
