Sri Naseer Ahmed v. The State of Karnataka

e -e1e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:12037 CRL.P(No.(14932(of(2025 IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( THDATED(THIS(THE(26 (DAY(OF(FEBRUARY,(2026( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( CRIMINAL(PETITION(NO.(14932(OF(2025( BETWEEN:(

1., SRI,NASEER,AHMED,, S/O,C,K,M,HYDER,,, AGED,ABOUT,66,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT,NO.,391,,, ND ND2 ,CROSS,,2 ,STAGE,,, ND80,FEET,ROAD,,RMV,2 ,STAGE,,, BANGALORE,NORTH,,, BANGALORE-560,094, …,PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,V.,LAKSHMINARAYANA,,SENIOR,ADVOCATE,FOR,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,SRI,CHANDPASHA,,ADVOCATE), Digitallytisigned AND:by0VIDYA0G0R Location: HIGH0COURT OF 1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, KARNATAKA BY,VIDHANA,POLICE,STATION,,, REP.,BY,STATE,PUBLIC,PROSECUTOR,,, HIGH,COURT,BUILDING,,, BANGALORE-560,001,,

2., SRI.,AMRUTHESH,N.P, AGED,ABOUT,51,YEARS,,, RESIDING,AT,NO.,15/1,,, ST RD1 ,FLOOR,,3 ,CROSS,,, e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:12037 CRL.P(No.(14932(of(2025 SAMPIGE,ROAD,,, MALLESHWARAM,,, BANGALORE-560,003, …,RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,JAGADEESHA,B.N.,,ADDL.,SPP,FOR,R1;, R2,-,SERVED,AND,UNREPRESENTED), , THIS,CRL.P,IS,FILED,U/S,528,OF,BHARATIYA,NAGARIK, SURAKSHA,SANHITA,,2023,,PRAYING,TO,QUASH,THE,CHARGE, SHEET, IN, C.C.NO.38171/2025, ARISING, OUT, OF, CRIME, NO.59/2019,REGISTERED,BY,THE,RESPONDENT,NO.1,POLICE, AGAINST, THE, PETITIONER, FOR, THE, ALLEGED, OFFENCES, P/U/S/,323,AND,341,OF,IPC,,1860,PENDING,ON,THE,FILE,OF, THE,XLII,ACJM,BENGALURU,VIDE,ANNEXURE-C,IN,SO,FAR,AS, THE,PETITIONER,IS,CONCERNED., , THIS,PETITION,COMING,ON,FOR,ADMISSION,THIS,DAY,, ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,S,SUNIL,DUTT,YADAV ORAL(ORDER Learned, counsel, for, the, petitioner, submits, that, the, present,petition,may,be,limited,to,the,relief,of,quashing,as, regards,the,offence,punishable,under,Section,323,of,IPC,, 1860.,,

2., It, is, submitted, that, insofar, as, the, offence, punishable, under, Section, 341, of, IPC, is, concerned,, the, petitioner,reserves,liberty,to,take,appropriate,stand,before, the,trial,Court,at,the,stage,of,hearing,before,charge.,,

¶3Taking note of such stand, the present petition is being considered insofar as the plea of the petitioner for setting aside of the proceedings relating to the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC.

¶4The petitioner before this Court is the sole accused in C.C.No.38171/2025 registered in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 341 of IPC. The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the charge-sheet registered by respondent No. 1 Police.

¶5The facts that are made out are that the respondent No.2 is stated to have made out a complaint to respondent No.1-Vidhana Soudha Police Station. The complaint makes out a narration that, on 10.07.2019 in front of the Office of Minister Sri K.J.George and the Speaker of Vidhana Soudha, while Mr. Sudhakar was proceeding to submit his resignation to the Speaker, some Members of the Legislative Council dragged Sri Sudhakar to the Chambers of the Minister and had assaulted him. It

is stated that in connection with the said incident, FIR was lodged, investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed.

¶6It is the case made out by the petitioner that the material placed on record even prima facie does not disclose any offence against the petitioner herein and accordingly, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner amounts to abuse of process of law.

¶7Perused the charge-sheet filed on 23.11.2020. It is made out that, on 10.07.2019 at about 04.00 p.m., when the Member of Legislative Assembly, Chikkaballapura and the Chairman of the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board was proceeding to tender his resignation to the Speaker at the West entrance of Vidhana Soudha, when he was proceeding near the lift, CW2 had obstructed the petitioner and assaulted him.

¶8Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that insofar as the case made out of assault, there is

neither supporting material nor any medical records indicating hurt. It is further submitted that no Wound Certificate is marked and the prima facie ingredients of Section 323 of IPC are not made out.

¶9On a careful reading of Section 321, it is necessary that an act must be done with an intention of causing hurt to a person. The ingredients of Section 321 of IPC are required to be fulfilled. It is necessary that, for the purpose of Section 323, hurt must be caused. The statement Sri K. Sudhakar, the then Member of Legislative Assembly, Chikkaballapura under Section 161 found at Exhibit-'E' would reveal that the only allegation made out is that the said Member was pulled, obstructed and shuffled. There is no medical record to indicate hurt. The charge sheet also does not have any material in support of the finding in Column-7 to establish that hurt was caused.

¶10Taking note of the statement of Sri K. Sudhakar under Section 161, it could be stated that no case is made

out insofar as the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC is concerned. It is necessary for the purpose of Section 323 that hurt must be caused, as it is an essential ingredient of the said offence. There is no statement by any of the witnesses as well to corroborate the allegation of assault resulting in hurt. In the absence of any such testimony or medical records to evidence that hurt has been caused, this Court finds that no offence punishable under Section of 323 of IPC is made out.

¶11Accordingly, the proceedings as regards the offence punishable Section 323 of IPC are set aside. The other contentions of the petitioner are kept open regarding the remaining offence, taking note of the stand of petitioner.

¶12Accordingly, the proceedings in C.C.No.38171/2025 pending on the file of XLII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru insofar as the offence punishable under Section of 323 of IPC stand quashed. e -e7e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:12037 CRL.P(No.(14932(of(2025 Subject, to, the, above, observations,, the, petition, is, disposed(of. Sd/-( (S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV)( JUDGE( VGR,