Sri. Ravi v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12665 OF 2026 BETWEEN:

SRI RAVI, S/O CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT NARAYANAPURA GRAMA, BADALGAV POST, AURAD TALUK, BIDAR DISTRICT - 585326. …PETITIONER (BY SMT RAJESHWARI M, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY BELLANDUR POLICE STATION, REP BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560001.

¶2XXX R/AT NO. 489, 6TH CROSS, KPC LAYOUT, NEAR LAKAS HOTEL, KASAVANAHALLI GRAMA, SARJAPURA ROAD, BANGALORE-560035. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ANOOP KUMAR M V,ADDL. SPP)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNNS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN FIR NO.254/2026 PENDING ON

Digitally signed by PRAMILA G V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE FILE OF XLI ADDL.CJ.M COURT AT BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 64 OF BNSS ACT 2023 BY BELLANDUR POLICE.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor is also present.

¶2This petition is filed to quash the FIR in Crime No.254/2026 pending before XLI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru for the offences punishable under Section 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

¶3The FIR is registered before the Bellanduru Police. The complaint dated 12.06.2026 is filed which is received on

13.06.2026. The alleged incident has taken place on

11.06.2026.

¶4It is alleged by the complainant that the petitioner has committed rape on 11.06.2026 when the victim had gone

to the work and the alleged incident has taken place in the premises of the employer. Petitioner is not the employer.

¶5Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for respondent No.2 are present before the Court and they have identified the parties before the Court. A joint application is filed by the petitioner and respondent No.2.

¶6It is noticed that the charge sheet is not yet filed. In the joint application filed by the petitioner and the second respondent/complainant, the second respondent has made a statement that she does not intend to prosecute the matter. Complainant claims that she is resident of Bihar and she intends to go back to Bihar.

¶7The application is also supported by the affidavit of the petitioner and the respondent No.2. It is stated that the dispute between them is amicably settled.

¶8The Court has made an enquiry with the parties who are present before the Court and they submit that they have entered into settlement without any coercion and force.

¶9By considering the allegations made and also by considering the contents of the joint memo and the fact that the charge sheet is not yet filed, the Court is of the view that there is no justification in prosecuting the petitioner and directing investigation.

¶10It is also submitted that nothing is recovered at the stage of the proceeding. Since the complainant herself is not willing to prosecute the matter, the joint application is allowed.

¶11Hence, the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) The proceeding in Crime No.254/2026 pending before XLI Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, is quashed.

(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

CHS/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 100