Case Note & Summary
The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru heard two criminal petitions filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR in Crime No.90 of 2025 registered by Jigani Police Station and the related intimation dated 19.05.2025 issued by the 2nd Additional District and Sessions Court, Bengaluru Rural District directing investigation. The petitioners in Criminal Petition No.8206 of 2025 were accused Nos.3, 4 and 5, while Criminal Petition No.8207 of 2025 was filed by accused Nos.1, 6, 7 and 8. The respondent No.2, Smt. M. Uma, was the complainant, belonging to Bhovi caste. The dispute arose from a land in Sy.No.21 of Mahalingapura Village, Anekal Taluk, which the complainant claimed was granted to her ancestors under the Mysore (Personal and Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954. The complainant alleged that the accused got their names entered in revenue records for the entire land and, during a pooja performed at the samadhi of her great grandfather, accused Nos.1 to 4 threatened and abused her and her sister using caste name. She further alleged that eucalyptus trees worth Rs.70 lakhs were removed and that later two sons of an accused used a JCB to remove the samadhis of Venkatappa and Eramma, and hurled abuses. The Jigani Police initially refused to register a complaint, terming it a civil dispute. The complainant then filed a private complaint under Section 223 of BNSS before the jurisdictional court, which referred the matter for investigation, leading to registration of FIR in Crime No.90 of 2025 for offences under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(t), 3(1)(a), 3(1)(za) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 329, 351, 45 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners contended that the pending civil disputes in O.S.No.1094 of 2016 and O.S.No.1052 of 2023 were projected as criminal offences including the Atrocities Act. They argued that the interim injunction granted in O.S.No.1094 of 2016 was not extended after 17-11-2021, and the complainant filed a belated application under Section 151 CPC on 15-01-2025, but no extension was granted. The court heard arguments from both sides and reserved orders on 17.08.2026, pronouncing on 28.08.2026. The provided text is truncated and does not include the final decision or ratio decidendi.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of FIR - Exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS - Petitioners sought quashing of FIR in Crime No.90/2025 registered under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(t), 3(1)(a), 3(1)(za) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 329, 351, 45 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Court heard arguments on whether pending civil dispute was projected as criminal case; no final order in extracted text (Paras 1-4). B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes - Offences under SC/ST Act - Applicability of Section 3(1) provisions - Allegations of caste-based abuse during land dispute - Court considered whether prima facie case under the Act made out based on complainant's averments of threatened caste abuse and removal of samadhis; no final determination in extracted text (Paras 3-3.3). C) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Section 151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Petitioners contended that interim injunction in O.S.No.1094/2016 was not extended after 17-11-2021 and complainant filed belated application on 15-01-2025 - Court noted pendency of civil suits and no extension of injunction; relevance to FIR quashing under consideration (Para 4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR in Crime No.90 of 2025 registered for offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is liable to be quashed as being based on a civil dispute; Whether the intimation dated 19.05.2025 directing investigation pursuant to private complaint under Section 223 BNSS is valid.
