Karnataka High Court
Mr. Khalander Shafi vs State Of Karnataka on 5 August, 2026
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
1
Reserved on : 22.04.2026
Pronounced on : 05.08.2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3533 OF 2025
C/W
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1199 OF 2025
CRIMINAL PETITION No.2880 OF 2025
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4149 OF 2025
IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.3533 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
ABDUL SATHAR
S/O BAVA BEARY
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT: NO.4-132/1, 4TH BLOCK,
Digitally BOLLAJE, KATIPALLA, MANGALURU TALUK
signed by D.K. DISTRICT - 575 030.
PADMAVATHI
BK ... PETITIONER
Location: High (BY SRI SANDESH J. COUTA, SR.ADVOCATE A/W
Court of SRI LETHIF B., ADVOCATE)
Karnataka
AND:
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KAVOOR POLICE STATION,
D.K.DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
2
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . HYDER ALI,
S/O B.M.AHAMAD BAVA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT:FLAT NO.1904,
ABHIMAN HILLS,
LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD,
MANGALURU,
D.K.DISTRICT - 575 003.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.BALAKRISHNAN, SPL.PP FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
B.N.S.S., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN
C.C.NO.67/2025 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 308(2), 308(5), 352,
351(2), 108 AND 190 ON THE FILE OF J.M.F.C III COURT,
MANGALURU OF KAVOOR P.S. WHICH IS PRODUCED AT
ANNEXURE-A.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.1199 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
MR.KHALANDER SHAFI
S/O LATE ISMAIL,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
R/AT: DO.NO.1-140/12
NANDAVARA HOUSE
SAJIPA MUNNOORU VILLAGE,
BANTWAL TALUK
D.K.DISTRICT.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI ABHISHEK MARLA M.J., ADVOCATE)
3
AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY KAVOOR POLICE STATION,
MANGALURU D.K
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . MR. HYDER ALI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
S/O B.M.AHMMED BHAVA
R/AT: FLAT NO. 1904
ABHIMAN HILLS,
LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD,
MANGALURU - 575 002.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.BALAKRISHNAN, SPL.PP FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED.)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
B.N.S.S., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST
THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED NO.4) PENDING BEFORE THE JMFC-III
COURT, MANGALURU IN C.C.NO.67/2025 FOR THE OFFENCES
P/U/S 308(2), 308(5), 352, 351(2), 50, 54, 61(2), 140(2), 108 R/W
SEC.190 OF BNS 2023.
IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.2880 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED SIRAJ SALAM
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
S/O.B.K.IJJABBA,
R/AT: D.NO.327/7,
BADRIYA JUMMA MASJID ROAD,
7TH BLOCK, KRISHNAPURA,
4
SURATHKAL, MANGALURU
D.K. DISTRICT - 575 015.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY SHO KAVOOR POLICE STATION,
MANGALURU, D.K DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
2 . HYDER ALI,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
S/O B.M.AHMED BAVA,
R/AT: FLAT NO. 1904,
ABHIMAN HILLS,
LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD,
MANGALURU, D.K. - 575 003.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.BALAKRISHNAN, SPL.PP FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
B.N.S.S., PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN CC.NO.67/2025
(CRIME NO.150/2024 OF KAVOOR POLICE STATION) PENDING ON
THE FILE OF JMFC (III COURT), MANGALORE, D.K. DISTRICT FOR
THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 308(2), 308(5), 352,
351(2), 50, 54, 61(2), 140(2), 108 R/W 190 OF BNS, 2023.
5
IN CRIMINAL PETITION No.4149 OF 2025
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMAD MUSTAFA @
FALCON MUSTAFA
S/O B.H.IDDINABBA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT: D/NO. 7-44B, 7TH BLOCK,
KRISHNAPURA, MANGALURU TALUK
D.K.DISTRICT - 575 014.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI IMTIAZ B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY SPP
HIGH COURT BUILDING
BENGALURU - 01.
2. HYDAR ALI
S/O BM AHMMED BAVA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT: FLAT NO. 1904, ABHIMAN HILLS,
LIGHT HOUSE, HILL ROAD,
MANGALURU, D.K.DISTRICT - 575 014.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.BALAKRISHNAN, SPL.PP FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 528 OF
B.N.S.S., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C
NO.67/2025 FOR THE O/P/U/S 50, 60(2), 108 R/W 190 ON THE
FILE OF JMFC III COURT, MANGALORE OF KAVOOR POLICE
STATION.
6
THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 22.04.2026, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CAV ORDER
These petitions are preferred by the petitioners in different
criminal petitions, who are accused Nos.1 to 6 in crime No.150 of
2024, which is now pending in C.C.No.67/2025, before the learned
JMFC III Court, Mangaluru, for the offences punishable under
Sections 308(2), 308(5), 352, 351(2), 50, 54, 61(2), 140(2), 108
r/w. 190 of the BNS.
2. Facts, in brief averred in one of the petitions viz.
Crl.P.No.3533 of 2025, which are common in other petitions, are as
follows: -
The 2nd respondent, one Hyder Ali is the informant. It is
alleged that he had suspected that his brother - Mamtaz has
committed suicide at Kooluru on 06-10-2024, by jumping to the
river from a bridge by parking his car near the bridge and that the
body was not traced. It is the further allegation that his brother
7
had received blackmailing calls from the accused - Smt.Rehamath,
Abdul Sattar, Shafi, Mustafa, Sohaib and Siraj from July, 2024 and
they have extorted huge amount of cash from the deceased.
Respondent No.2 - complainant has drawn all of them as accused
and sought to take action against those persons. The complaint
further narrates that the deceased Mamtaz, a social activist, had
gained name and fame in the locality. The deceased was the head
of the religious institution and in order to tarnish his image, the
accused are alleged to have conspired together and due to political
rivalry made allegations that the deceased was having illicit
relationship with a lady by name Rehamath and the said rumor was
circulating in the locality, apart from the fact that the accused had
demanded money of upto ₹50/- lakhs from the deceased. The said
transaction is also narrated in the complaint that the accused who
had demanded the amount of ₹50/- lakhs had received a cheque
for ₹25/- lakhs, which was encashed by one of the accused. Before
commission of the suicide, the brother of the complainant is said to
have sent a voice message to all the accused making them
responsible for his death and the voice message further recorded
that the accused must be punished for spreading false rumors of
8
him having illicit relationship with the lady and on that pretext
demanding money, which led to commission of suicide. Based on
the aforesaid fulcrum of the complaint, a crime in Crime No.150 of
2024 comes to be registered for the offences punishable as afore-
quoted against these accused. Investigation ensues. The police
complete the investigation by recording the statement of the
complainant/brother of the deceased and sending the voice
message for forensic examination. Then they have filed different
charge sheets in these cases. Filing of the charge sheets have
driven these petitioners to this Court calling in question filing of the
charge sheets and drawing them as accused.
3. Heard Sri Sandesh J. Chouta, learned senior counsel
appearing for the petitioner in Criminal Petition No.3533 of 2025;
Sri Abhishek Marla M.J, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
in Criminal Petition No.1199 of 2025; Sri Nishit Kumar Shetty,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in Criminal Petition
No.2880 of 2025; Sri Imtiaz B, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner in Criminal Petition No.4149 of 2025 and
Sri S.Balakrishnan, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for
9
respondent No.1/State in all the cases. Complainant though
served, remains unrepresented in all the petitions.
4. The learned senior counsel Sri Sandesh J. Chouta
spearheading the submissions would vehemently contend that the
facts narrated in the complaint nor the findings in the summaries of
the respective charge sheets would indicate any act of these
petitioners, which would become the ingredients of abetment to
suicide. He would contend that the accused for whom he is
appearing i.e., accused No.3 is alleged to have committed the
offences punishable under Sections 50, 61, 108, 142 r/w 190 of the
BNS. Cognizance is taken for the aforesaid offences. It is his
submission that if the role of the petitioner/accused No.3 is seen, it
is that accused No.3/Abdul Sathar had lost in the election to the
deceased for the post of President of a mosque who was also the
President of an educational institution. Therefore, the rivalry
between the brother of the complainant and the petitioner was
continuously brewing. Accused Nos.2 to 4 had decided to place
illicit relationship of accused No.1 with the deceased before
prominent leaders of the Society and such conspiracy is said to
10
have generated these problems. The learned senior counsel
submits that let alone accused No.3, none of the accused can be
alleged of any wrong doing for it to become an offence under
Section 108 of the BNS or any other offence alleged against these
petitioners.
5. The learned counsel appearing for other petitions in the
respective petitions would toe the lines of the learned senior
counsel in submitting that if the role of each of the accused is
noticed, it would not make out ingredients of any of the offences
alleged against these petitioners. Though the charge sheet so filed
is voluminous, there is no warrant to permit trial on such
allegations, which do not constitute the ingredients of abetment to
suicide or any of the offences alleged.
6. The learned senior counsel would also take this Court
through the statements of CWs-1, 11, 37 and 38 all to indicate that
there is no act of abetment to suicide or extortion as the case would
be. The learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners in
unison would seek quashment of the proceedings.
11
7. Per contra, the learned Special Public Prosecutor
Sri S. Balakrishnan would refute the submissions in contending that
if this does not make out a case for abetment to suicide no other
can. All the accused together have indulged in separate acts which
have resulted in the commission of suicide of the brother of the
complainant. It is therefore, the learned counsel would submit that
it is a matter of trial for the petitioners to come out clean. He
would take this Court through the complaint and particular
references in the charge sheets of each of the accused to contend
that the case at hand is shrouded with seriously disputed questions
of fact, all of which need to be thrashed out in a full-blown trial. He
would submit that there is no warrant of interference at the hands
of this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482/528 of
the Cr.P.C./BNSS in the case of this nature. He would submit that
the Apex Court in plethora of cases has held that when an issue is
shrouded with seriously disputed questions of fact, this Court must
not lend its protective hand to such accused.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners again in
unison would join issue to contend that there are no ingredients of
12
the offences so alleged even if this Court would take a microscopic
view of the allegations and would seek to place reliance upon
several judgments rendered by the Apex Court or this Court as the
case would be. They would seek to place reliance upon the
following judgments.
(i) DAVID D'SOUZA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA -
2024 SCC OnLine Kar 47.
(ii) KUMAR @ SHIVA KUMAR v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
- (2024)19 SCC 308
(iii) V.V. SINGARA VELU v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
- AIR OnLine (2023) Kar 1470 / CRL.P.3095 OF 2022
Decided on 16.06.2023
(iv) AYYUB v. STATE OF U.P. - (2025) 3 SCC 334.
(v) M.ARJUNAN v. STATE - AIR 2019 SC 43.
(vi) SHABBIR HUSSAIN v. STATE OF M.P. -
(2021) 17 SCC 807
(vii) PATEL BABUBHAI MANOHARDAS v. STAET OF
GUJRAT - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 503.
(viii) MAHENDRA AWASE v. STATE OF M.P. - AIR 2025 SC
568.
(ix) THANGAVEL v. STATE - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2933
(x) NIPUN ANEJA v. STATE OF U.P. -
2024 SCC OnLine SC 4091.
13
(xi) MOHIT SINGHAL v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND -
(2024) 1 SCC 417
(xii) PRAKASH v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA -
2024 SCC OnLine SC 3835.
(xiii) ABHINAV MOHAN DELKAR v. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA - 2025 SCC Online SC 1725.
(xiv) R.SHASHIREKHA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA -
2025 SCC OnLine SC 671
(xv) YADWINDER SINGH @ SUNNY v. STATE OF
PUNJAB - 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2332.
9. Learned Special Public Prosecutor also would place reliance
on certain judgments all of which would bear consideration qua
their relevance in the course of the order.
10. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.
11. The afore-narrated facts are a matter of record and they
would not require any iteration. The protagonists of the crime,
accused Nos.1 to 6 have different roles to play in the episode, all of
which began when the complaint comes to be registered by the
14
brother of the deceased. Since the entire issue triggered from
registration of the complaint, I deem it appropriate to notice the
complaint. It reads as follows:
" ಂದ,
ೈದ ಆ (52)
ತಂ ೆ: .ಎಂ ಅಹಮ ಾವ
ಾಸ: ಾ ನಂಬ : 1904 ಅ !ಾ" #$%,
&ೈ ೌ( #$ )ೋ, ಮಂಗಳ/ರು.
2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ : 9448456555
3ೆ,
4ಾ5ಾ67ಾ ಗಳ8
7ಾವ9ರು : ೕ( 4ಾ5ೆ
7ಾವ9ರು ಮಂಗಳ/ರು.
!ಾನ;)ೇ,
<ಾನು =ೕ ನ >?ಾಸದ ಾಸ ಾ@ ೆAೕ<ೆ. ನನB ಸ ೋದರ .ಎಂ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ರವರು
E<ಾಂಕ: 06.10.2024 ರಂದು ೆG3ೆH 04-00 ಗಂIೆ3ೆ ಕೂಳ/ರು ಬG ಇರುವ Kೇತು ೆಯ ಬG 7ಾರನುB
M N ಆ)ೋOತರುಗಳ ಪ Qೋದ<ೆRಂದ ನE3ೆ ಾ ಆತ ಹSೆ; !ಾTರುವ ಬ3ೆH ಅನು!ಾನ>ದುA
ಶವ ೊ)ೆVರುವWEಲ. ನನB ಸ ೋದರM3ೆ 2024 <ೇ ಜು&ೈ VಂಗGMಂದ ಇ ಯವ)ೆ3ೆ ಾ Z =ೕ$
!ಾT Mರಂತರ ೆದ N ಲ[ಾಂತರ ರೂ\ಾR ಹಣವನುB ^ತುC7ೊಂಡು ಮತCಷುa ಹಣ7ೆb ೆದ 7ೆ MೕTದ
ಆ)ೋOಗ?ಾದ 1) d ೕಮV )ೆಹಮe 2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ : 8660557538 ಮತುC 9036602555 2)
ಅಬುA$ ಸSಾC 2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ : 9845026398 3) fಾg (ಮರಳ8 ಾ;\ಾ ) 4) ಮುಸC ಾ
2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ : 9482516661 5) fೆhೕಯi 2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ : 7483321172 6) N)ಾD
(ಅಬುA$ ಸSಾCರ 7ಾರು Qಾಲಕ) ಇವರುಗಳ >ರುದA ಕ ಮ ಜರೂ@ಸಲು ದೂರು.
ನನB ಸ ೋದರ ಮು!ಾCD ನು ಅತ;ಂತ 3ೌರ ಾMje ವ;^Ckಾ@ದುA, ಕ?ೆದ 30
ವಷlಗGಂದ KಾವlಜMಕ mೕವನದ ಸ^ ಯ ಾ@ದುA, ಸ!ಾಜ Kೇ ೆ ಮತುC fೈnoಕ [ೇತ ದ
Kಾಕಷುa ೆಸರು !ಾTರುSಾC)ೆ. ಇದಲ ೇ ಹಲವW pಾqlಕ ಸಂKೆrಗಳ ಮುಖ;ಸr)ಾ@ದುA, ಅವರ
15
ಪ NEAಯನುB ಾಳ8 !ಾಡುವ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಆ)ೋOತರುಗ?ೆಲ ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕdತ)ಾ@ Kೇ 7ೊಂಡು
ಷಡ;ಂತ ವನುB ರೂONರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ ಸSಾCರ ಎಂಬವನು ನನB ಅಣuನ )ಾಜ^ೕಯ >)ೋEkಾ@ದುA
>)ೋEkಾ@ದುA,
ಆತನನುB ಮು@ಸ ೇ7ೆಂದು )ೆಹಮe ರವ)ೊಂE3ೆ =ೕ&ೆ VGNದವರು Kೇ ಸಂಚನುB ರೂON ಾA)ೆ.ೆ
ಅಲ ೇ ಹಲವW ಾ ೈ#ಕ ಾ@ ಹ&ೆಯನುB !ಾTರುವ ಬ3ೆH ನನB !ಾತ<ಾಡುವ ಸಮಯ ನನB ಅಣu
ನನB VGNರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ
)ೆಹಮe ಎಂ ಾ7ೆಯು ನನB ಅಣu<ೊಂE3ೆ ಅಕ ಮ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಇ ೆ ಎಂದು ಸುಳ8x
ಸುಳ8x ಪ QಾರವನುB
!ಾT ೆಸರನುB ಾಳ8 !ಾಡುSೆCೕ<ೆ ಎಂದು ೆದ N ಈ3ಾಗ&ೇ 50 ಲn^bಂತಲು ಅ6ಕ 2ತCವನುB
ಪzೆEರುವ >Qಾರ ನನ3ೆ VGEದುA, ಇದಲ ೇ 25 ಲn ರೂ ನ QೆZ ನುB ೆದ N ಾ Z =ೕ$ !ಾT
ಪzೆದು ಎ" 7ಾ;ಶಮಂ !ಾT7ೊಂTರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ ಅಲ ೇ ಇನೂB 50 ಲn ಹಣವನುB 7ೊಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು
ಆ)ೋOಗಳ8 Mರಂತರ ೆದ 7ೆ ಾ^ದ >QಾರವನುB ಸಹ ನನB ನನB ಅಣu ಮು!ಾCD VGNರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ
ನನB ಅಣuನ ಮ<ೆಯವ ಗೂ ಇ ೇ ೕV ೆದ 7ೆ ಾ^ರುವ >Qಾರ ಈಗ ನನ3ೆ VGದುಬಂEರುತC ೆ.ೆ
ನನB ಅಣu 7ಾ5ೆkಾಗುವ 2ದಲು =ೕ&ೆ VGNದ ಆ)ೋgಗಳ8 ಆತನ Kಾ>3ೆ
7ಾರಣ)ಾ@ರುSಾC)ೆ. ಮತುC ಅವರನುB d{ಸ ೇಕು ಎಂದು ಈ Eನ E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 06.10.2024 ರಂದು ೆಳ3ೆH
03-30 ಗಂIೆ3ೆ ಾR( =KೆD )ೆ7ಾಡl!ಾTದ ೇG7ೆಯನುB ನನB 2 ೈ$ ನ ಾಟ%} 3ೆ
ಕಳ8#NದುA, ಇದನುB <ಾನು ಕೂಳ/ ನ ನನB ಅಣuನ 7ಾರು M Nದ ಸrಳದ ಅಣuನನುB
ಹುಡು7ಾಡುVCರು ಾಗ ನನB 2 ೈ$ ನ ೆG3ೆH ಸು!ಾರು 11-00 ಗಂIೆ3ೆ <ೋTರುSೆCೕ<ೆ.
<ೆ
ಆದುದ ಂದ ನನB ಅಣu ಮು!ಾCD M3ೆ ಅಕ ಮ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಬ3ೆH ಅಪ ಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@
ೆದ N Eನ Mತ; ಹಣ7ಾb@ ಾ Z =ೕ$ !ಾT Mರಂತರ ^ರುಕುಳ MೕT ಹಣವನುB MೕಡEದA)ೆ
7ೊ&ೆ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@ ಭಯವನುBಂಟು !ಾT ಬಲವಂತ ಾ@ ಹಣವನುB ಪzೆದು7ೊಂಡು ಸ!ಾಜದ
ಆತನು mೕವನ !ಾಡದಂತಹ ಾSಾವರಣವನುB ಸೃ€aN ಆತ ಹSೆ; !ಾT7ೊಳ8xವಂSೆ ಪ Qೋದ<ೆ
MೕTದ ಆ)ೋOತರುಗಳ >ರುದ• ಸೂಕC 7ಾನೂನು ಕ ಮ 7ೈ3ೊಳ8xವಂSೆ ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ತಮ
>ನಂVಸುSೆCೕ<ೆ.
<ೆ
ಇದ)ೊಂE3ೆ ಾಟ%} ನ ಕಳ8#Nದ ಾR( =ೕKೆD ಗಳನುB \ೆ" zೆ‚ƒ ನ 7ಾO
!ಾT ಾಜರುಪTNರುSೆCೕ<ೆ."
<ೆ
(Emphasis added)
The allegations in the complaint are already narrated. The
police then conduct investigation and file the charge sheet as
16
obtaining under Section 193 of the BNSS. The summary of the
charge sheet as obtaining under Column No.17 reads as follows:
"ಮಂಗಳ/ರು
ಮಂಗಳ/ರು ನಗರ 7ಾವ9ರು : ೕ( 4ಾ5ಾ ಅ.ಕ
ಕ 150/2024.
ಕಲಂ:
ಕಲಂ 308(2), 308(5), 352, 351(2), 61(2), 50, 54, 140(2), 108 „ೊSೆ3ೆ 190 ಎ".ಎ(
ಎ" ಎ(
ೋ...ಾ)ೋಪ5ಾ ಪತ ದ 7ಾಲಂ:
7ಾಲಂ 17 ರ ಮುಂದುವ 7ೆ
ಈ ೋ...ಾ)ೋಪ5ಾ ಪತ ದ 7ಾಲಂ 12 ರ ಯ ದ.ಕ m&ೆಯ ಮಂಗಳ/ರು Sಾಲೂ^ನ
ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ 3ಾ ಮದ Kಾ!ಾನ; ರಹ ಾNಗ?ಾ@ರುವ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗ?ಾದ ಎ-1, ಎ-2, ಎ-3, ಎ-5, ಮತುC
ಎ-6 <ೇಯವರು ಮತುC ಬಂIಾjಳ Sಾಲೂಕು \ಾ5ೆ ಮಂಗಳ/ರು 3ಾ ಮದ ನಂ ಾವರದ ರಹ ಾNkಾದ
ಎ-4 <ೇಯವರು ಈ ಪ ಕರಣದ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ 3ಾ ಮದ ರಹ ಾNkಾದ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ ಮNೕEಯ
ಕq†ಯ ಅಧ;n ಾಗೂ ಮಂಗಳ/ ನ >>ಧ ಮುNಂ ಸಂಘ-ಸಂKೆrಗಳ ಪ ಾ67ಾ kಾದ ಸ!ಾಜದ
3ೌರವಯುತ ವ;^Ckಾ@ರುವ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB ಗು kಾ@ N7ೊಂಡು ಪ ಕರಣದ
ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 1 ಮತುC 2 <ೇ ಯವರು 2022 ರ ಜನವ VಂಗGನ ತಮ ಮಕbಳನುB ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರದ
„ೆಹರುತುC$ ಇKಾಂ ಎಂಬ ಪ9ವl \ಾ ಥqಕ fಾ&ೆ ಮು‰Šದ 7ಾರಣ, ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು
ಅಧ;n)ಾ@ದAಂತಹ qKಾ‹Œ ಎಜು7ೇಷ" \ೌಂzೇಶ" ನ ಪ9ವl \ಾ ಥqಕ fಾ&ೆ3ೆ ತಮ ಮಕbಳನುB
Kೇ ಸಲು ಸಂಪ^lN, ಸಂಪಕl7ೆb ಬಂದ ಬGಕ ಪ ಕರಣದ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ)ೋOSೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ಕzೆ3ೆ
ಆಕ€lತ?ಾ@ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು d ೕಮಂತ ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ಎನುBವWದನುB
ಎನುBವWದನುB VGದು7ೊಂಡು ಎರಡ<ೇ
ಆ)ೋOತನ ದು...ೆ•ೕ
ದು...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆRಂದ
...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆRಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB &ೈಂ@ಕ ಾ@ ಮರಳ8 !ಾT ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯವ ಂದ !ಾŽl 27, 2022 ಂದ ತನB •ಾSೆ3ೆ ಹಣವನುB ವ3ಾlRN7ೊಳxಲು ಆರಂ NದುA,
ಇನೂB ೆ‰Šನ ಹಣವನುB ೊಡ• ಪ !ಾಣದ ಸು 3ೆ !ಾಡುವ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಾಗೂ Nr)ಾNC
)ಾNCಯನುB
ೊಂದುವ ಾಗೂ ಐfಾ)ಾq mೕವನವನುB ನzೆಸುವ ದುರು ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಮಂಗಳ/ ನ ಕುಲfೇಖರ
ಎಂಬ ರುವ >fಾj( ೆ IೇD ಅ\ಾಟl=ಂ ಕಟaಡದ ಾ ಸಂ•ೆ; 1110 <ೇಯದರ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ
50 ರವ ಂದ ಾT3ೆ ಮ<ೆ ಪzೆದು7ೊಂಡು E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 13-04-2022 ಂದ ಾಸCವ; ಹೂT VಂಗG3ೆ
13000/- ರೂ ಹಣವನುB 2<ೇ
<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತನ ಾ;ಂZ •ಾSೆಯ ಮು•ಾಂತರ ಮ<ೆಯ !ಾ ೕಕ 3ೆ
VಂಗG3ೆ ಾT3ೆಯನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ ಂದ 7ೊTಸುSಾC &ೈಂ@ಕ ಾ@ ೈ#ಕ ಸಂಪಕlವನುB
ಆರಂ NದುA, ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ 3ೆ VGಯದಂSೆ 2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನ ದು...ೆ•ೕ
ದು...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆRಂದ
...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆRಂದ ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಾಗೂ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ „ೊSೆkಾ@ದA ಸಮಯ
ಸಮಯ ಅವಳ 2 ೈ$ ನ 'ೕIೋ ಮತುC
>T"ೕಗಳನುB Sಾ<ೇ )ೆ7ಾ,l !ಾT7ೊಂಡು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ "ಂE3ೆ ೆ‰Šನ ಆV"ಯSೆ
ಸಂಪಕlವನುB ಮುಂದುವ)ೆN ಅವ 3ೆ VGಯದಂSೆ ಅವರ 2 ೈ$ ನ ದA ೆವ)ೇ 7ಾಂIಾ;Za
ಗಳನುB ಾಗೂ ಕುಟುಂ ಕರ !ಾ#VಗಳನುB VGದು7ೊಂಡು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ ಾ;ಂZ •ಾSೆಗಳ
•ಾSೆಗಳ
ಮೂಲಕ ತನB ಾಗೂ 2<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನ ಾ;ಂZ •ಾSೆಗG3ೆ ಹಣವನುB ವ3ಾlRN7ೊಂTರುSಾC? ೆ.ೆ
17
1<ೇ ಮತುC 2<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಪರಸ•ರ ಒಳಸಂಚು ನzೆN
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB ೆದ N kಾ ಬ&ಾದ ಹಣದ ಮೂಲಕ ಸjಂತ ಾ ೊಂದುವ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ
ಾಗೂ ಇನೂB ೆ‰Šನ ೕVಯ ಹಣವನುB ಸು 3ೆ !ಾಡಲು ಉ ೆAೕdN 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು 2<ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತMಂದ ಗಭlವVkಾ@ದAರೂ ಈ ಗಭlವW ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ೇಹಸಂಪಕlEಂದ ಬಂದ ೆAಂದು
ೆದ N ಈ ಕು ತು 2<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತM3ೆ ಸಂಶಯ ಉಂIಾ@ ೆ ಎಂದು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB ಾZ
=ೕ$ !ಾT ೆದ N 2<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನ ಸ!ಾpಾನ7ಾb@ ಉ!ಾ kಾSೆ 3ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ
ಖ‰lನ --ೕ ೋ@ ಬಂEದುA ಬGಕ ಅ ೇ 7ಾರಣವನುB ಮುಂEಟುa7ೊಂಡು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ
ಸ ೋದರರ ಒzೆತನದ zೆ&ಾa ಕಂಪMಯ ೆಸ ನ ೊಸ Kಾ;˜ ಸಂ™ 2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" ನುB
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ ಂದ&ೇ ಪzೆದು7ೊಂTರುSಾC? ೆ.
E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 08-06-2023 ರಂದು 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಗಂಡು ಮಗು>3ೆ ಜನ MೕTದುA, ಆ
ನಂತರದ ಮಗು>ನ >QಾರವನುB ಮುಂEಟುa7ೊಂಡು ತನB ಾಗೂ ಮಗು>ನ ಾಸCವ;7ೆb ಸjಂತ ಾ
ಖ ೕEN7ೊಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಎ?ೆಗೂಸನುB Sೋ N ಾZ =ೕ$ !ಾಡಲು ಆರಂ Nದ ಬGಕ 1 <ೇ
ಆ\ಾESೆಯನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು ಭಯEಂದ ದೂರ!ಾಡಲು ಪ ಯVBN ಾಗ,
ಾಗ 1 ಮತುC 2<ೇ
<ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತರು
ಆ\ಾEತರು Kೇ 7ೊಂಡು ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ KೆBೕ#ತ 3ೆ ಕ)ೆ!ಾT ಉ ೆAೕಶ ಪ9ವlಕ ಾ@
ಅವರ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB >Qಾ ಸ&ಾರಂ NದುA, ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ ಪVB,
ಪVB ಮಕbಳ8,
ಮಕbಳ8 ಅಣu
ತಮ ಂEರು,
ಂEರು ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ಾಗೂ ಅವರ ೌಬlಲ;ದ ಅಂಶಗಳನುB VGದು7ೊಂಡು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ
ಮ<ೆಯ ಬG,
ಬG ಕšೇ ಯ ಬG,
ಬG ೋ@ ಅವರನುB ಾZ =ೕ$ !ಾT ಭಯ ೕGN ಅವರ KೆBೕ#ತರು
ಾಗೂ ಇತರ ಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು ಇರುವ ಸrಳವನುB ಪSೆC ಹಚುŠವ ಪ ಯತB ಆರಂ NದುA,
ಇದ ಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು ಮkಾl ೆಯ ಉGಯು>3ಾ@ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ೇGದಂSೆ
>fಾj( ೆ IೇD ಕಟaಡದ 1003 <ೇ ಸಂ•ೆ;ಯ ಾ ನುB Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 44 <ೇಯವರ ಮು•ಾಂತರ 1 <ೇ
ಆ\ಾESೆ ಮತುC 2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರು 37 ಲn ರೂಗG3ೆ ಖ ೕE !ಾಡುವ ೇ?ೆ3ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು
Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 5, Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 6 ಮತುC QಾKಾ 10 <ೇಯವರ ಮು•ಾಂತರ ವ;ವ ಾರದ ಕು ತು Kಾಲ ಾ@
ಪzೆದು7ೊಂಡ ರೂ 11 ಲnಗಳನುB Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 44 <ೇ ಯವ 3ೆ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ ೆದ 7ೆ ಅಂm
\ಾವVNದುA, E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 08-09-2023 ರಂದು Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-143
Kಾ <ೇಯವರ ಕšೇ ಯ ಖ ೕE !ಾ)ಾಟ
ಕ)ಾರು ಪತ 7ೆb Kಾ{ ಸ# !ಾT ಾA)ೆ,ೆ ಸE ಾ †ನ ಇಂ† ಯ TKೈ" 3ಾ@ ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯವ ಂದ 8 ಲn ಹಣವನುB ಖಚುl !ಾTN Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-2<ೇಯವರ
Kಾ <ೇಯವರ ೆಸ ನ ಗೃಹಪ"ೕ@
ವಸುCಗಳನುB ಖ ೕE !ಾTN ತನB ಾಸCವ;ದ
ವ;ದ >?ಾಸ7ೆb Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-132,
Kಾ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ - 146 <ೇಯವ ಂದ
zೆ ವ ಪzೆದು7ೊಂTರುSಾC? ೆ.ೆ 1 ಮತುC 2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರು ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯವರ ಾ;ಂZ
•ಾSೆRಂದ ಹಣ ಪzೆಯುವWದನುB ಮುಂದುವ)ೆNದುA ಮಂಗಳ/ರು ನಗರದ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-56
Kಾ <ೇಯವರ ಾಬುC
ಾಬುC
)ಾಯ$ Iೆ ೕ )ೆKೊaೕ)ೆಂ Mಂದ ಊIೋಪQಾರದ Kೌಲಭ;ವನುB ಸಹ ಪzೆದು7ೊಂTರುSಾC
ಪzೆದು7ೊಂTರುSಾC? ೆ.ೆ 1<ೇ
<ೇ
ಅ\ಾESೆಯು ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯವರ ಅ >3ೆ ಾರದಂSೆ ಅವರ KೆBೕ#ತರ ಮು•ಾಂತರ !ಾ#VಯನುB
18
ಪzೆದು7ೊಂಡು #ಂ ಾ ಸುVCದುA ದೂರ ೋಗದಂSೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ =ೕ&ೆ M3ಾ> N7ೊಂTದAಳ8
E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 02-12-2023 ರಂದು ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯವರ ವVRಂದ 1003 <ೇ ಸಂ•ೆ;ಯ ಾ 3ೆ
ಾಸCವ;ವನುB
;ವನುB ಬದ&ಾRNದುA, Sಾನು ತನB Kಾ;˜ ಸಂ™ 2 ೈ$ ನ ರುವ ಆT"ೕ
>T"ೕಗಳನುB T ೕ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@ VGN ತನ3ೆ ೊಸ IPHONE 2 ೈ$ 'ೕ"
7ೊTಸುವಂSೆ ೇT7ೆ ಇಟa =ೕ)ೆ3ೆ E<ಾಂಕ 16-02-2024 ರಂದು 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ \ಾ 3ೆ ೊಸ
2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" ಖ ೕE !ಾT7ೊಂಡು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು ೋ ಾಗ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ತನB
Kಾ;˜ Kಾಂ™ 2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" ನ TKೆœೕ ಯನುB Sಾ<ೇ ಜಖಂ3ೊGN 2 ೈ$ ಾ?ಾ@ರುವW ಾ@
VGN ೊಸ IPHONE ಪzೆದು7ೊಂಡವಳ8 ಅ ೇ Eನ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ &ೈಂ@ಕ ಾ@
ೈ#ಕ ಸಂಪಕlವನುB !ಾTNದುA, ಆ ಸMB ೇಶಗಳನುB ೊಸ IPHONE ನ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ
ಯವರ
ಗಮನ7ೆb ಾರದಂSೆ 1003 <ೇ \ಾ ನ ೆ, ರೂ˜ ನ >T"ೕ )ೆ7ಾTಂl™ !ಾT7ೊಂTದುA
ಸE >T"ೕವನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ 3ೆ ಾZ =ೕ$ !ಾಡುವ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಅವರ ಅ >3ೆ ಾರದಂSೆ
ಐ- 7ೌ, ನ ಸಂಗ #NದAಳ8.
8
ನಂತರದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ 3ೆ,
3ೆ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ತನB KೆBೕ#ತ ಲ^b Kಾa
<ಾNೕರವ)ೊಂE3ೆ ಸಂಪಕlದ ರುವ >Qಾರ ಗಮನ7ೆb ಬಂದು ಅವ ಬ‹ ಗೂ ೈಮನಸು%ಂIಾ@
E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 09-10-2023 ಮತುC 10-10-2023 ರಂದು ಾIಾ%} ನ ಾ3ಾjದ ನzೆEದುA ಆ
ಸಂದಭlದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ , ಲ^b Kಾa <ಾNೕ ಾಗೂ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು 7ಾನ•
7ಾನ•)ೆ"%
ನ•)ೆ"% 7ಾ$ ನ
ಪರ(ಪರ
ಪರ(ಪರ !ಾತುಕSೆ ನzೆNದ ಬGಕ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು 1 ಮತುC 2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತ)ೊಂE3ೆ
ಅಂತರವನುB 7ಾಯುA7ೊಂTದುA, 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB ತನB
ಹದುAಬNCನ ಟುa7ೊಳ8xವ ಸಲು ಾ@ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ಅವರ ಅಣu ತಮ ಂEರು,
ಂEರು, ಕುಟುಂಬದವರನುB
ಾಗೂ KೆBೕ#ತರನುB ಸಂಪ^lN ತನB ಾಗೂ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ನಡು>ನ ಸಂಬಂಧದ >QಾರಗಳನುB,
>QಾರಗಳನುB
KಾವlಜMಕ ಾ@ ಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@ ೆದ NರುSಾC? ೆ.ೆ
1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ d ೕಮಂV7ೆ Kೌಲಭ;ಗGಂದ ಆಕ€lತ?ಾ@ 2<ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತನ ಕುಮ ^bMಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯನುB ಮದು ೆkಾಗುವ ೇT7ೆಯನುB ಇ N ಸ!ಾನ
ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ QಾKಾ-2 ಮತುC ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ ಗೂ >ರಸವನುBಂಟು !ಾಡುವ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ
ಮು!ಾ D ಅ QಾKಾ-2, ಮತುC ಮಕb?ೆ/ ಂE@ರುವ ೇ?ೆಯ Mರಂತರ ಾ@ ಕ)ೆ !ಾಡುVCರು ಾಗ
Qಾ.Kಾ 2 <ೇಯವರು ಸಂಶಯ3ೊಂಡು E<ಾಂಕ 13-04-2024 ರಂದು ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ
2 ೈ$ Mಂದ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ ಕ)ೆ !ಾT ಾಗ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ ಕ)ೆಯನುB Njೕಕ N Qೊ&ೋರು
ಬಂ3ಾರ ( ೇಳ8 ಬಂ3ಾರ) ಎಂದು ೇG ಾಗ Qಾ.Kಾ-2 <ೇಯವರು ಅನು!ಾನ3ೊಂಡು ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯವರ ಸ ೋದರ Qಾ.Kಾ-1 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-8 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ ಈ >QಾರವನುB VGNರುSಾC)ೆ.
ಇದ ಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ತುಂ ಾ ಭಯ ೕತ)ಾ@ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ೇGದಂSೆ ನzೆದು7ೊಳxಲು
ಆರಂ Nದರು. ಈ >Qಾರದ ಬ3ೆH Qಾ.Kಾ-2 <ೇಯವರ , n= 7ೇಳಲು 1 <ೇ ಅ\ಾEತ ಮತುC 2 <ೇ
19
ಆ\ಾEತನನುB E<ಾಂಕ 04-05-2024 ರಂದು Qಾ.Kಾ-08 <ೇಯವರ ಮ<ೆ3ೆ ಕ)ೆRN Qಾ.Kಾ-2
<ೇಯವ 3ೆ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯವರು ಕ)ೆ !ಾT Sೊಂದ)ೆ7ೊಟa >Qಾರದ ಬ3ೆH 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯವ ಂದ
Qಾ.Kಾ-2 <ೇಯವರ , Qಾ Kಾ-1, Qಾ.Kಾ-7, Qಾ.Kಾ-8 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ 52 <ೇಯವರ ಸಮnಮ n=
7ೇGNರುSಾC)ೆ. ಇದ ಂದ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ ೆjೕಷ3ೊಂಡು
ಮು!ಾ D ಅ Rಂದ 2022 ರ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಮNೕE ಚು<ಾವ5ೆಯ , 3 ಮತಗಳ ಅಂತರದ
ಪ)ಾಭವ3ೊಂಡ ಾಗೂ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಮತುC ಅವರ ಕುಟುಂಬದ ಬ3ೆH ೆjೕಷEಂದ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ
ಮNೕE ಅಧ;n ಹು ೆARಂದ 7ೆಳ@Gಸಲು ಮತುC ದ.ಕ m&ಾ ವZ• ೋ,l ಾಗೂ ಮುNಂ Kೆಂಟ $
ಕq†ಯ ಅಧ;n ಹು ೆA3ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಸ•6lಸದಂSೆ !ಾಡುವ ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶವನುB ೊಂEದA
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ ಬE kಾ ಮNೕEಯ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ >)ೋ6 3ಾ;ಂ™ ಎಂದು
ಗುರುVಸಲ•ಟa ಪರಸ•ರ ಮರಳ8, ಗುಜು ವ;ವ ಾರ ನzೆN7ೊಂTರುವ ಾಗೂ )ಾಜ^ೕಯ ಾ@ಯೂ ಸಹ
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರ ಸ ೋದರ Qಾ.Kಾ 05 <ೇಯವರ >ರುದ• ಾ@ದA. 3<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತ ಾಗೂ ಆತನ
3ಾ;ಂ™ ನ ಸದಸ;)ಾದ 4, 5 ಮತುC 6<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಾಗೂ ಇತರರ ಸ ಾಯವನುB ಪzೆಯಲು
Mಧl N 1<ೇ ಮತುC 2<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತರವರುಗಳ8 ತನ3ಾದ ಅವ!ಾನ ಪ Vೕ7ಾರ Vೕ N7ೊಳxಲು 3<ೇ
ಅ\ಾEತನ ಗಮನ7ೆb E<ಾಂಕ 05-05-2024 ರಂದು 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ತಂ ಾಗ 3<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತನು
SಾವW ಈ >QಾರವನುB ಮುNಂ ಸ!ಾಜದ ಗಣ;ರ ಮುಂ ೆ ಇ N ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ ಂದ ಹಣವಸೂ
!ಾT7ೊಡುವW ಾ@ ಾಗೂ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ ಮದು ೆ !ಾTಸಲು
ಪ ಯVBಸುವW ಾ@ ದು...ೆ•ೕ N ಇದ7ೆb ಪ Vkಾ@ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ >ಷಯವನುB ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ
ಮNೕE ಕq† ಗಮನ7ೆb ತಂದು ಅ\ಾESೆ 1<ೇಯವರ ಾಗೂ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ನಡು>ನ
ಸಂಬಂಧವನುB ಮುಂEಟುa7ೊಂಡು ಅವಮkಾl ೆ3ೊGN ಅವನನುB ಮNೕE ಅಧ;n ಹು ೆARಂದ
7ೆಳ@Gಸಲು ತಮ3ೆ ಸಹಕ ಸ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಪರಸ•ರ ೊಂ ಾo7ೆ !ಾT7ೊಂTರುSಾC)ೆ.
ನಂತರ 3,4,5 ಮತುC 6.<ೇ
<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತರುಗಳ ದು...ೆ•ೕ
ದು...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆ
...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆ =ೕ)ೆ3ೆ 1 ಮತುC 2<ೇ
<ೇ
ಅ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 Kೇ 7ೊಂಡು 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ತನB 2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ 9036602555 <ೇಯದ ಂದ
ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ಪVB Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-2
Kಾ <ೇಯವ 3ೆ E<ಾಂಕ 04-08-2024 ರಂದು ಪ ೇ ಪ ೆ
ಕ)ೆ!ಾT
ಕ)ೆ!ಾT ^ರುಕುಳ MೕTದುA ಇದ ಂದ ೇಸತC Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-2<ೇಯವರು
Kಾ <ೇಯವರು )ಾV 10 ಗಂIೆ3ೆ ಸE 2 ೈ$
ಸಂ•ೆ;3ೆ ಕ)ೆಯನುB !ಾT ಾಗ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಅ\ಾESೆಯ ಮಗ?ಾದ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 41 <ೇಯವರು ಕ)ೆ Njೕಕ N
Sಾನು ತನB dn^3ೆ ಕ)ೆ !ಾಡಲು ೋ@ ಕ)ೆ ತO• ಬಂE ಾA@ ೇGದA ಂದ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 2 <ೇಯವರು
ಸಂಶಯ3ೊಂಡು E<ಾಂಕ 05-08-2024 ರಂದು 9036602555 ನಂಬ 3ೆ ಕ)ೆ !ಾT ಾಗ 1<ೇ
<ೇ
ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಕ)ೆಯನುB Njೕಕ N !ಾತ<ಾTದುA ನzೆದ ಸಂŸಾಷ5ೆಯನುB 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ತನB
ಪ9ವl "ೕಜ<ೆಯಂSೆ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 2<ೇಯವರ
<ೇಯವರ Sೇ„ೋವpೆ !ಾಡುವ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ )ೆ7ಾ,l
!ಾT7ೊಂಡ ಆT"ೕ ^ಪನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ಕುಟುಂಬದವ)ಾದ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 7<ೇ
<ೇ ಯವ 3ೆ ಮತುC
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತM3ೆ ಕಳ8#N7ೊ†aದುA, ಅದನುB 3<ೇ
3<ೇ <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು 4, 5, ಮತುC 6<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತ 3ೆ fೇ
20
!ಾTರುSಾC<ೆ.ೆ ಈ 2 ೈ$ ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳನುB ಬಳN7ೊಂಡು 3 ಂದ 6<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8
ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಮNೕEಯ ಸದಸ; 3ೆ ಾಗೂ KಾವlಜMಕ 3ೆ ಆT"ೕಗಳನುB
7ೇGN ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ಾಗೂ ಅವರ ಪVB Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-2
Kಾ <ೇಯವರ >ರುದ• ಅಪಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡಲು
\ಾ ರಂ NರುSಾC)ೆ,ೆ ಇದ ಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಮತುC ಕುಟುಂಬದವರು ೆದ ದುA ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯನುB
!ಾನNಕ ಾ@ ಕು@Hಸುವ ಕೃತ;ಗಳನುB ಆ\ಾEತ 1 ಂದ 6 <ೇ ವ)ೆ@ನವರು ನzೆNರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ
ಆ\ಾEತರು ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 14-06-2024 ರಂದು ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರರ 3<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತ
ಮ<ೆಯ ಮತುC E<ಾಂಕ:01-08-2024
E<ಾಂಕ ರಂದು ಮಂಗಳ/ ನ ಗುರುಪWರ ಎಂಬ ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 1, 2,
3, 4, ಮತುC 6 ರವರು ಒಟುa Kೇ 7ೊಂಡು ಮುಂದ7ೆb ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯ >ಷಯದ kಾವ ೕV
7ಾಯl ಪ ವೃತC)ಾಗ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಚ‰lN7ೊಂಡು ಒಳಸಂಚು ನzೆN ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 3 ಂದ 6<ೇ
<ೇ ಯವರು
ಈ >QಾರವನುB ಸ!ಾಜದ ಗಣ; ವ;^Cಗಳ ಮುಂ ೆ ಇಟುa 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ ಮತುC 2 ಆ\ಾEತ 3ೆ <ಾ;ಯ
ಒದ@N7ೊಡುSೆCೕ ೆಂದು ಆfಾjಸ<ೆ MೕT !ಾTದ ಒಳಸಂ‰ನ ಪ 7ಾರ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರು E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 10-
08-2024 ರಂದು ಎರಡ<ೇ ಶM ಾರ ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 3, 4 ಮತುC 6 <ೇಯವರು „ೊSೆkಾ@
ಮಂಗಳ/ Mಂದ ಕೃ...ಾu
ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ7ೆb 4<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನ ಾಬುC
ಾಬುC 7ಾ ನ ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 3, 4 ಮತುC 6
<ೇಯವರು ೋಗುVCರು ಾಗ ಪ9ವl"ೕmತ ಸಂ‰ನಂSೆ 3 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ
2 ೈ$ 3ೆ ಾIಾ%} Mಂದ ಕ)ೆ !ಾT ಾಗ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ
qKಾ‹ fಾ&ೆಯ >ಷಯದ ಪ ಚಯ ಾದ@Mಂದ ಆರಂಭ ಾ@ 3 <ೇ ಮಗು ಜMಸುವವ)ೆ3ೆ ಾಗೂ
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ತನBನುB Mಲln !ಾಡುVCರುವ ಬ3ೆH ಾಗೂ ಅವರ ೆಂಡV"ಂE3ೆ ಅ<ೊBೕನ; ಾ@
ಇರುವ ಬ3ೆH ಆ\ಾEN 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ ಮತುC ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಬ3ೆH >ವರ ಾ@ 2 ೈ$
ಮೂಲಕ VGNದAನುB 4<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು 18 ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳ ಒಟುa 17 Mqಷ 8 Kೆ7ೆಂ, ಗಳ
ಸಮಯದ ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳನುB ತನB 2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" ನ Kೆ$• )ೆ7ಾTಂl™ !ಾT7ೊಂTರುSಾC<ೆ,ೆ
E<ಾಂಕ 12-08-2024 ರಂದು ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 1,2,3,5,6 <ೇಯವರುಗಳ8 ಆ\ಾEತ 3 <ೇಯವರ
ಮ<ೆಯ Kೇ ಮುಂEನ ನzೆಯ ಬ3ೆH ಒಳಸಂಚು !ಾಡುSಾC 4 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತM3ೆ E<ಾಂಕ 10-08-
2024 ರಂದು
ರಂದು !ಾT7ೊಂಡ ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳನುB Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ -37 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ ಕಳ8#ಸಲು ಸೂ‰NದಂSೆ
4 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 12-08-2024 ರಂದು 4<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ)ೋOತನು Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ.
Kಾ 37 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ fೇ
!ಾTರುSಾC<ೆ.ೆ
E<ಾಂಕ: 14-08-2024 ರಂದು QಾKಾ 37 <ೇ ಯವರು ತಮ3ೆ ಬಂದ 18 ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳ
\ೈ^ 4 ಆಯA ^} ಗಳನುB ತನ3ೆ ಪ ಚಯದ ಅಬುA$ <ಾNೕ @ ಲ^b Kಾa <ಾNೕ ಎಂಬವ 3ೆ
ಕಳ8#NದುA ಅದನುB ಅಬುA$ <ಾNೕ @ ಲ^b Kಾa <ಾNೕ ರವರು E<ಾಂಕ: 16-08-2024 ರಂದು
Qಾ.Kಾ-17, Qಾ.Kಾ-18,Qಾ.Kಾ-19 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-21 ಇತರ 3ೆ ತನB ಾ % ಆ} Mಂದ fೇ
!ಾTರುSಾC)ೆ.
21
E<ಾಂಕ:17-08-2024 ರಂದು 3 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತ ಮ<ೆಯ ಮpಾ;ಹB ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 1, 2,
5,ಮತುC 6<ೇ ಆ)ೋOತರುಗಳ8 ಒಟುa Kೇ 7ೊಂಡು ಈ ಕು Sಾ@ Qಾ.Kಾ. 37 <ೇಯವರ ಬG ದೂರು
Mೕಡುವ ಕು Sಾ@ ಚ‰lNದಲ ೆ, ಈ >ಷಯದ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯನುB ಸ ೆಬTಯಲು ಇನೂB ಏ<ೆ&ಾ
!ಾಡಬಹುದು ಎಂಬ ಬ3ೆH ಚ‰lN7ೊಂಡು ಒಳ ಸಂಚನುB ನzೆNರುSಾC)ೆ
ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 1 ಂದ 6<ೇಯವರುಗಳ8 ಪ9ವl"ೕmತ ಒಳಸಂ‰ನಂSೆ E<ಾಂಕ: 19-08-
2024 ರಂದು ಮಂಗಳ/ ನ ಸaರZ ರKೆCಯ ರುವ Qಾ.Kಾ 37<ೇಯವರ ಕšೇ 3ೆ ೋ@ ಕšೇ ಯ
ಒಳ3ೆ ೋಗುವ 2ದಲು ೊರ3ೆ Qಾ.Kಾ. 37<ೇ ಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ ನzೆಸುವ !ಾತುಕSೆಯನುB 5<ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತನು )ೆ7ಾ,l !ಾT7ೊಳx ೇ7ೆಂದು ಒಳಸಂಚು ನzೆN 2<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು ಕšೇ ಯ ೊರ3ೆzೆ
7ಾರು \ಾ^ಂl™ ನ ಇದುA ಉGದ 5 ಜನ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಅಪ)ಾಹB Qಾ.Kಾ-37ರವರ ಕšೇ ಒಳ3ೆ
ೋ@ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 Qಾ.Kಾ 37<ೇಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ !ಾತುಕSೆ ನzೆಸುವ ೇ?ೆ3ೆ 3<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು
Qಾ.Kಾ. 37 <ೇಯವರ ಬG ಮು!ಾCD ಅ Rಂದ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತG3ೆ ಒಂದು 7ೋ† ಹಣ
7ೊTಸ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಾಗೂ ಆ7ೆಯನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ "ಂE3ೆ ಮದು ೆ !ಾTಸ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಾಗೂ
ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಮNೕEಯ ಅಧ;n Kಾrನ7ೆb ಮು!ಾCD ಆ Rಂದ )ಾm<ಾ= 7ೊTಸ ೇ7ೆಂದು
ೇT7ೆಯMBIಾaಗ Qಾ.Kಾ 37<ೇಯವರು Sಾನು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಮತುC ಅವರ ಕುಟುಂಬವನುB
ಒzೆಯುವWEಲ MೕವW : ೕ( 4ಾ5ೆಯ ಅಥ ಾ ೇ)ೆ ೕVಯ ಸಮKೆ; ಬ3ೆಹ N7ೊಳx ೇಕು
ಎಂದು ೇGರುSಾC)ೆ. ಇದ ಂದ ಅಸಮpಾನ3ೊಂಡ ಆ)ೋOತ)ೆಲರೂ Qಾ.Kಾ 37 <ೇಯವರ 2 ೈ$
ನ ರುವ ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳನುB T ೕ !ಾಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಒSಾCRN Qಾ.Kಾ-37 <ೇಯವರ ಕšೇ
ಕಟaಡದ ೊರ3ೆ ಬಂದವರು ಅ&ೇ ೊರಗzೆಯ 6 ಜನ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶವನುB
ೊಂE ಅಕ ಮಕೂಟ Kೇ N7ೊಂಡು ಒಳಸಂಚು ನzೆN 1 <ೇ ಅ\ಾESೆಯು 3,4,5,6 <ೇಯ
ಆ\ಾEತರುಗG3ೆ ಕೃತ;ದ ಸಹಕ NದA7ೆb ತ&ಾ 25,000/- ರೂ ಹಣವನುB MೕTರುSಾC)ೆ. ನಂತರದ
Eನಗಳ ಅ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಹಣವನುB ಖಚುl !ಾTರುSಾC)ೆ. 1 ಮತುC 2<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗG3ೆ
ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಮತುC 1<ೇ ಅ\ಾESೆಯ >ಷಯಗಳನುB KಾವlಜMಕ 3ೆ ಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡುವಂSೆ ಮತುC ಆ
ೕV ಒತCಡ ೇ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯನುB ಾಸದ ಸrಳ7ೆb ಕ)ೆRN7ೊಂಡು ಅ ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ !ಾT
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ 7ೈ7ಾಲು ಮು ದು ಹಣ ವಸೂ !ಾಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು ದು...ೆ•ೕ N ಪ QೋENರುSಾC)ೆ.
ಅಲ ೇ ಈ -q&ಾ ಹಬ‹ದ ಸಂದಭlದ Qಾ.Kಾ- 2 <ೇಯವರು ನಡSೆ3ೆಟaವ?ೆಂಬ ಬ3ೆH ಾಗೂ
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಮತುC 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಬ3ೆH ತಮ ಬG ಇರುವ ^} ಗಳನುB ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ
ಬE kಾ ಮNೕE ಮುNಂ ಜ!ಾe ಸದಸ;ರು ಮತುC KಾವlಜMಕ 3ೆ Sೋ N ಅಪಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡಲು
Mಧl Nದರು. 3,4,5 ಮತುC 6 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರು ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ ಮNೕE ಆವರಣದ ಸಂ„ೆ ೇ?ೆ3ೆ
KಾವlಜMಕ 3ೆ ತಮ ಬG ಇದA ಆT"ೕ ^} ಗಳನುB 7ೇGN ಅಪಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡುವWದನುB Qಾ.Kಾ-22,
Qಾ.Kಾ-23, Qಾ.Kಾ-24, Qಾ.Kಾ-25, Qಾ.Kಾ-26 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-28,Qಾ.Kಾ-29 ರವರು
7ೇGN7ೊಂಡು Qಾ.Kಾ-1, Qಾ.Kಾ-5 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-6 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ VGNರುSಾC)ೆ.
22
ಇದ ಂದ ಪ Ÿಾ>ತ)ಾದ 1<ೇ ಅ\ಾEತಳ8 2 ಾ ೈಕಂ\ಾTಯ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ
ಕšೇ 3ೆ ೋ@ ಅ Qಾ.Kಾ-11 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-34<ೇ ರವರ ಮುಂ ೆ 7ೈRಂದ ಮು!ಾCD =ೕ&ೆ ಹ&ೆ
ನzೆNದAಲ ೇ E<ಾಂಕ 13-09-2024 ರಂದು 1 ಮತುC 2<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ 3ೆ
ಕ)ೆ!ಾT ಈ ಸಮKೆ;ಯನುB ಪರಸ•ರ !ಾತುಕSೆRಂದ ಬ3ೆಹ N7ೊ?ೆ/ xೕಣ ಎಂದು ೇG
ಅ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 3,4,5 ಮತುC 6 <ೇಯವರ ದು ...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆಯಂSೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ 7ೈ7ಾಲು ಮು ದು ಹಣ
7ೊಡ ಲ ೆಂದ)ೆ 7ೊ&ೆ !ಾT--ೕ Vೕರ ೇಕು ಎಂದು ಪರಸ•ರ Mಧl N7ೊಂಡು )ಾV 10-30
ಗಂIೆಯ ಬGಕ ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯನುB ತಮ 1003 ನಂಬ ದ \ಾ 3ೆ ಕ)ೆN7ೊಂಡವರು ಅ ಯೂ
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ =ೕ&ೆ 7ೈRಂದ ೊzೆದು ೆ, ರೂಂ ಒಳ3ೆ ತGx, ಅಕ ಮ ಾ@ ಕೂT ಾ^ ಆತನ
2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" ಗಳನುB ^ತುC, ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ !ಾT Sೆ3ೆE N7ೊಂಡು 50 ಲn ರೂ\ಾR ಹಣ
7ೊಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು ಇಲ ೇ ೋದ 7ೈ7ಾಲು ಮು ದು 7ೊ&ೆ !ಾT ಎKೆಯುSೆCೕ ೆ ಎಂದು ೆದ 7ೆ
MೕTದAಲ ೇ 7ೈಗGಂದ ಹ&ೆ !ಾT ಾ ನ ಸುತCಮುತC ನ ಜನರನುB ಮತುC ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರದ
KಾವlಜMಕರನುB ಾಗೂ ಅ\ಾEತ 3 ಂದ 6<ೇವ)ೆ@ನವರನುB ಕ)ೆN ಗ&ಾIೆ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@ ಾಗೂ
ತನB ಬGRರುವ :ೕIೋ ಾಗೂ >T"ೕಗಳನುB ಅವರುಗG3ೆ Sೋ N MನB !ಾನಹರಣ
!ಾಡುವW ಾ@ ೆದ Nದ 7ಾರಣ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು mೕವಭಯEಂದ Sಾನು ೇGದಂSೆ
7ೇಳ8SೆCೕ<ೆಂದು ೇG ಾಗ ಮು!ಾCD ರವರ ಬGRದA 2QೆZ ಗಳನುB ಬಲವಂತ ಾ@ ^ತುC
Sೆ3ೆದು7ೊಂಡು ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ !ಾT ಆ QೆZ ಗG3ೆ ಅವರ 7ೈRಂದ&ೇ ಒಂದು QೆZ ೕ¢ 3ೆ 10 ಲn
2ತCವನುB ಾಗೂ 20-12-2024 E<ಾಂಕವನುB ಮತುC ಮSೊCಂದು QೆZ ೕ¢ ನ 15 ಲnದ
2ತCವನುB ಾಗೂ 17-01-2025 E<ಾಂಕವನುB ಅಪ)ಾ6ಕ ಬಲಪ "ೕ@N ಬ)ೆRN7ೊಂಡು )ಾV
ಇT 7ೋ5ೆಯ ಕೂT ಾ^ದುA, ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯವರನುB ೆG3ೆH ವ)ೆ3ೆ ೆ, ರೂಂ ನ ಕೂT
ಾ^ರುವWದನುB ೆಳ@ನ „ಾ ಾ 1 ಮತುC 2 <ೇ ಅ\ಾEತರುಗಳ ಈ ಾ†3ೆ Mತ; 7ೆಲಸ7ೆb ಬರುVCದA
Qಾ.Kಾ 38<ೇರವರು ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB 7ೋ5ೆಯ ಕೂT ಾ^ರುವWದನುB <ೋTರುSಾC)ೆ.
ೆದ ದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು mೕವಭಯEಂದ Sಾನು 50 ಲn 7ೊಡುವ)ೇ ಒO•7ೊಂಡ ಬGಕ Qಾ.Kಾ
38<ೇಯವರು 7ೆಲಸ ಮು@N7ೊಂಡು ೋದ ಬGಕ 14-09-2024 ರ ೆG3ೆH ಟುa ಕಳ8#NರುSಾC)ೆ.
E<ಾಂಕ 15-09-2024 ರಂದು 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತಳನುB ೈಕಂ\ಾT ಕšೇ 3ೆ ಬರಲು VGN ಅ
Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-11
Kಾ ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-1
Kಾ <ೇಯವರ ಬG ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು Sಾನು )ೆಹಮe 3ೆ 50 ಲn
ಹಣ7ೊಡಲು Mಧl NದುA, ಈ3ಾಗ&ೇ 2 QೆZ MೕTರುSೆCೕ<ೆ,
<ೆ ನನ3ೆ ಹಣದ ಸಮKೆ; ಇರುವWದ ಂದ 3
ಸ# !ಾTದ QೆZ ಗಳನುB ಒದ@N7ೊಡುವಂSೆ 7ೋ ದುA ಅದರಂSೆ Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-1
Kಾ <ೇಯವರು 3 QೆZ
ಗಳನುB MೕTರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ QಾKಾ 11 ರವರ ಸಮnಮ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಈ3ಾಗ&ೇ
Sೆ3ೆದು7ೊಂಡ 2 QೆZ ನುB ಾಪಸು% MೕಡುವಂSೆ 7ೇG ಾಗ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು M)ಾಕ NದುA, ಇದ ಂದ
ೇಸತC ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ತನB ಾಬುC
ಾಬುC, ೆಡರ$ ಾ;ಂZ ನ ಇ<ೊBಂದು QೆZ ಬುZ ನ 25 ಲn ರೂ
23
QೆZ ಬ)ೆದು 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ MೕTರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ ನಂತರ 1<ೇ
<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ 2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ ಅನುB
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ತನB 2 ೈ$ :ೕ" ನ ಾZ !ಾTರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ
ಅ ೇ Eನ Qಾ.Kಾ.1<ೇ ಯವರು ಾಗೂ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯವರು 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ 2 ೈ$
ನ ರುವ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ 3ೆ ಾಗೂ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ ಸಂಬಂ6Nದ :ೕIೋ ಮತುC &ೈಂ@ಕ >T"ೕ
ಗಳನುB T ೕ !ಾಡುವಂSೆ VGN ಾಗ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಈ 2 ೈ ನ ನನB ಪಸlನ$ zಾIಾ
ಇದುA ಅದನುB ೇ)ೆ 2 ೈ$ 3ೆ ವ3ಾlRN zಾIಾ T ೕ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@ VGNರುSಾC? ೆ, ಾಗೂ
Qಾ.Kಾ-1 <ೇಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ ಮಂಗಳ/ ನ !ಾ;ಪ$ fೆhೕರೂಂ3ೆ ೋ@ Qಾ.Kಾ-58<ೇ ಯವರ
ಸಮnಮ Qಾ.Kಾ-1 <ೇಯವರು ಖ ೕEN 7ೊಟa ೊಸ ಐ'ೕ" 3ೆ zೇIಾ ವ3ಾlRಸುವ ಕು ತು
ಪ ಯVBಸುವ <ಾಟಕ ಾT ಸಂ„ೆ ೇ?ೆkಾ@ದA ಂದ ಮ<ೆ3ೆ ೋ@ Sಾ<ೇ zೇIಾವನುB ವ3ಾlRN
2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" #ಂEರು@ಸುವW ಾ@ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತಳ8 VGN ೋ@ರುSಾC? ೆ, ನಂತರ Qಾ.Kಾ 1
<ೇಯವರು 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ 2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" #ಂEರು@ಸ ೇ7ೆಂದು 7ೋ 7ೊಂzಾಗ 1<ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತಳ8 ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಆತನ 2 ೈ$ ನ ತನB 2 ೈ$ ನಂಬ ವನುB ಅ" ಾZ
!ಾTದA !ಾತ MೕಡುವW ಾ@ ಇಲ ೇ ೋದ ತನB ಬG ಇರುವ ಆT"ೕ ಮತುC >T"ೕಗಳನುB
ಪ Qಾರ !ಾಡುವW ಾ@ ಾಗೂ ಈ >Qಾರದ ಬ3ೆH ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ ಮNೕE3ೆ ೋ@ ಕq†ಯ
ದೂರು MೕಡುವW ಾ@ ೆದ NರುSಾC? ೆ.
E<ಾಂಕ: 16-09-2024 ರಂದು 1 <ೇ ಆ)ೋOತG3ೆ 5 <ೇ ಆ)ೋOತನು ಕ)ೆ !ಾT Mೕನು
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ 50 ಲnವಲ 5 7ೋ† ರೂ\ಾRಗಳನುB 7ೇಳ ೇ7ಾ@ತುC ಆತ 2 7ೋ†
ಹಣವ<ಾBದರು 7ೊಡುVCದA ಎಂದು ದು...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆ MೕT ಅಪ)ಾಧ !ಾಡಲು ಪ QೋENರುSಾC)ೆ.
E<ಾಂಕ 27-03-2022 ಂದ E<ಾಂಕ 19-09-2024 ರವ)ೆ3ೆ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಮು!ಾCD
ಆ "ಂE3ೆ ಸಂಪಕlದ ರು ಾಗ ಾಗೂ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು <ಾ<ಾ 7ಾರಣಗಳನುB ೇG
ೆದ ಸುVCದA ಂದ Vೕ)ಾ ೆದ ದ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಾಗೂ Qಾ.Kಾ 2 <ೇಯವರ ಾ;ಂZ •ಾSೆಗGಂದ
28 ಲZಷ ರೂ\ಾRಗಳಷುa ಹಣವನುB ಸು 3ೆ ರೂಪದ ತನB •ಾSೆ3ೆ ಜ= !ಾTN7ೊಂTರುSಾC? ೆ.
ನಂತರ E<ಾಂಕ: 20.09.2024 ರಂದು 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ ಕ)ೆ !ಾT ಾಗ 3, 4, <ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತರ „ೊSೆಯ ದA 5<ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನು ಕ)ೆ !ಾTದುA ಆ ಸಮಯ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯು 1 <ೇ
ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ 25 ಲn ರೂ\ಾRಯ QೆZ ನುB MೕTದ ಬGಕ ತನB 2 ೈ$ ನುB ಾZ !ಾTರುವW ಾ@
VGNದುA ಅದ7ೆb ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ೇ3ಾದರೂ !ಾT ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯನುB ಸಂಪ^lಸುವ ಬ3ೆH ಆತನ
KೆBೕ#ತ 3ೆ ಸಂಬಂ6ಕ 3ೆ, ಪ ಚಯಸr 3ೆ :ೕ" ಕ)ೆಗಳನುB !ಾT ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯ ಬ3ೆH ಇಲದ
ಸಲದ ಅಪಪ QಾರಗಳನುB !ಾT ಆತMಂದ ಇನೂB ೆ‰Šನ ಹಣವನುB ^ತುC7ೊಳ8xವಂSೆಯೂ ಾಗೂ
ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಮNೕEಯ ಅಧ;n ಪದ>Rಂದ 7ೆಳ3ೆ ಇGಸ ೆ7ೆಂತಲೂ VGN ಾ3ೆ !ಾTದ)ೇ 3, 4 ಮತುC
5 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರದ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆ3ೆ ಾ; ನ ವ;ವKೆr !ಾT7ೊಡುವW ಾ@ ಾಗೂ
24
2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನನುB 4 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತನ „ೊSೆಯ ಮರಳ8 ಾ;\ಾರದ \ಾಲು ಾರರ<ಾB@
Kೇ N7ೊಂಡು ಇನೂB ೆ‰Šನ &ಾಭ !ಾT7ೊಡುವW ಾ@ VGಸುವ ಮೂಲಕ ದು ...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆ MೕTರುSಾC)ೆ.
ನಂತರವW ಸಹ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು 1 <ೇ ಅ\ಾEತಳನುB ಸಂಪ^lಸ ೇ ಇ ಾAಗ 1 <ೇ
ಅ\ಾESೆಯು ತನB ಮೂರ<ೇ ಮಗುವನುB E<ಾಂಕ 20-09-2024 ರಂದು ಅ£ೇ<ಾ ಆಸ•Sೆ 3ೆ ‰^Sೆ%3ೆ
ಾಖ N ಆ <ೆಪEಂದ Qಾ.Kಾ 01, 11, 14, 15, 34, 46 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ ಸಂಪ^lN ಾಗ Sಾನು
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ !ಾತ<ಾಡ ೇಕು ಮಗುವನುB ‰^Sೆ%3ೆ ಾಖ N ೆA<ೆಂದು ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯವ 3ೆ ಸಂ ೇಶ ಮುಟುaವ ೕVಯ ಾZ =ೕ$ !ಾTರುSಾC? ೆ, ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯೂ ಇ...ೆa&ಾ
ಆದರೂ ಅವಳನುB ಸಂಪ^lಸ ೇ ಇದುAದA ಂದ E<ಾಂಕ: 25-09-2024 ರಂದು QಾKಾ 38<ೇಯವರ
2 ೈ$ Mಂದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ 3ೆ 'ೕ" ಕ)ೆ !ಾT ತನ3ೆ ಎರಡು 7ೋ† ಹಣ Mೕಡ ೇಕು. MನBನುB
ಸತCರೂ ಡುವWEಲ ಎಂದು ೇG, E<ಾಂಕ 06-10-2024 ರಂದು Sಾನು ಮಗು><ೊಂE3ೆ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ
ಬE kಾ ಮNೕE3ೆ ೋ@ MನB >ರುದ• ದೂರು MೕಡುವW ಾ@ ೆದ 7ೆ ಾ^ದುA ಇದ ಂದ ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯು !ಾನNಕ ಾ@ ಕು@H Qಾ.Kಾ-2 <ೇಯವರ ಬG ಅಳ8SಾC, ಈ >QಾರವನುB ೇGದುA ಇದ ಂದ
ಭಯ ೕತ)ಾದ Qಾ.Kಾ 2<ೇಯವರು ಮತುC ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯನುB ಕ)ೆದು7ೊಂಡು E<ಾಂಕ: 04-10-
2024 ರಂದು ೆG3ೆH 06-30 ಗಂIೆ3ೆ 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ ಾಸದ ಾ; ಸಂ•ೆ; 1003 3ೆ ೋ@
Qಾ.Kಾ-2 ಮತುC ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು ನಮ ದು ತ\ಾ•@ ೆ ನಮ ನುB ಟುa ಡು KಾವlಜMಕ ಾ@
ನನB ಗಂಡನ ಅವಮkಾl ೆ !ಾಡ ೇಡ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಮNೕE3ೆ ೋ@ ದೂರು Mೕಡ ೇಡ ಎಂದು
ಪ ಪ kಾ@ 7ೋ 7ೊಂಡರೂ 1<ೇ ಅ\ಾESೆಯು QಾKಾ 2 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ MೕವW ನನB n= 7ೇGN
ತಪW• !ಾTEAೕ ನನ3ೆ 2 7ೋ† ಹಣ Mೕಡ&ೇ ೇಕು, ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ
ಬE kಾ ಮNೕEಯ ಅಧ;n Kಾrನ7ೆb )ಾm<ಾ= 7ೊಡ ೇಕು ಾಗೂ ನನBನುB ಮದು ೆkಾಗ ೇಕು
ಎಂದು ೇT7ೆ ಇ†aದುA ಇದ7ೆb ತO•ದA E<ಾಂಕ 06-10-2024 ರಂದು Sಾನು ಮಗು><ೊಂE3ೆ
ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ ಮNೕE3ೆ ೋ@ MನB ಗಂಡನ >ರುದ• ದೂರು MೕT ಮkಾl ೆ Sೆ3ೆದು MನB
ಗಂಡನನುB ಚT•ಯ M ಸುವW ಾ@ ೆದ 7ೆ ಾ^ರುSಾC? ೆ. 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಈ >QಾರವನುB ಉGದ
ಆ\ಾEತರುಗ?ಾದ 3 ಂದ 6 <ೇಯವರುಗG3ೆ VGNರುSಾC? ೆ. ಈ >QಾರವನುB VGದು7ೊಂಡ
ಆ\ಾEತ 3,4,5, ಮತುC 6 <ೆಯವರು ಅ ೇ Eನ ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಬE kಾ ಮNೕEಯ ಆವರಣದ ಮುNಂ
ಜ!ಾe ಸದಸ; 3ೆ ಮತುC KಾವlಜMಕ 3ೆ ಸುEA !ಾT E<ಾಂಕ 06-10-2024 ರಂದು ಮNೕEಯ
ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯವರ >ರುದ• KೇರುವಂSೆ ಪ Qೋದ<ೆ !ಾಡುVCದA >QಾರವನುB 7ೇGN7ೊಂಡ Qಾ.Kಾ
22, Qಾ.Kಾ-23, Qಾ.Kಾ-24, Qಾ.Kಾ-25, Qಾ.Kಾ-26 ಮತುC, Qಾ.Kಾ-28,Qಾ.Kಾ-29 <ೇಯವರು
7ೇGN7ೊಂಡು Qಾ.Kಾ-1, Qಾ.Kಾ-5 ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-6 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ VGNರುSಾC)ೆ.
E<ಾಂಕ: 05-10-2024 ರಂದು ೆG3ೆH 08-11 ಗಂIೆ3ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು 1<ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯ
ಮೂರ<ೇ ಮಗು><ೊಂE3ೆ ಆಟ ಾಡುVCರುವ >T"ೕವನುB ತನB ಾIಾ%} Kೆaೕಟ( 3ೆ ಅ} &ೋ,
25
!ಾTದುA ಅದನುB ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ ಸಂಬಂ6ಕರುಗ?ಾದ Qಾ.Kಾ-28, Qಾ.Kಾ-29 <ೇಯವರು
<ೋTರುSಾC)ೆ, ನಂತರ Qಾ.Kಾ-29 <ೇಯವರು ತಮ 2 ೈ$ ನ , Qಾ.Kಾ-28 ರವರ Kೆaೕಟ(
ನ ರುವ >T"ೕವನುB )ೆ7ಾ,l !ಾT Qಾ.Kಾ-28 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ ಕಳ8#NದುA, Qಾ.Kಾ-28 <ೇಯವರು
ಈ >T"ೕವನುB Qಾ.Kಾ-35 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ ಕಳ8#NದುA, Qಾ.Kಾ-35 <ೇಯವರು Qಾ.Kಾ-5<ೇಯವರ
ಮಗ<ಾದ =ಹಶh¢ 3ೆ ಕಳ8#NದುA, ಅವರು Qಾ.Kಾ-1 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ ಕಳ8#NರುSಾC)ೆ. 1<ೇ
ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ತನB 2 ೈ$ ನ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ನನB ಮೂರ<ೇ ಮಗು><ೊಂE3ೆ
ಆಟ ಾಡುVCರುವ >T"ೕವನುB ತನB ಾIಾ%} Kೆaೕಟ( 3ೆ ಾ^ರುವ >QಾರವನುB Qಾ.Kಾ 29
<ೇಯವರು ಕೂಡ&ೇ Qಾ.Kಾ-1<ೇಯವ 3ೆ ೇGದುA, Qಾ.Kಾ-1 <ೇರವರು ಈ >ಷಯವನುB ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ 3ೆ VGN ಈ >Qಾರದ ಬ3ೆH Sಾನು ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ-29 <ೇಯವರು 1 ಆ\ಾESೆ"ಂE3ೆ !ಾತುಕSೆ
ನzೆN ಸ ಪTಸುSೆCೕ ೆ. Mೕನು ‰ಂSೆ !ಾಡ ೇಡ ಎಂದು ೇGರುSಾC)ೆ. ಆದ)ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಈ
>QಾರEಂದ !ಾನNಕ ಾ@ ಕು@H ಭಯ ೕತ)ಾ@ರುವW ಾ@ Qಾ.Kಾ-2 <ೇಯವರು VGNರುSಾC)ೆ. 1<ೇ
ಆ\ಾESೆಯು Sಾನು ಾIಾ%} Kೆaೕಟ( 3ೆ >T"ೕ ಅ} &ೋ, !ಾTದ ಬ3ೆH Qಾ.Kಾ-29 ಮತುC
Qಾ.Kಾ 1 <ೇಯವ 3ೆ VGN ತನ3ೆ 2 7ೋ† ಹಣ MೕT !ಾತುಕSೆ !ಾಡ ೇಕು ಇಲEದA E<ಾಂಕ
06-10-2024 ರಂದು ಕೃ...ಾuಪWರ ಮNೕE3ೆ ೋ@ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ >ರುದ• ಜ!ಾe ಕq†3ೆ ದೂರು
MೕಡುವW ಾ@ ೆದ NರುSಾC? ೆ.
ಈ >QಾರಗGಂದ ಮನ<ೊಂದು ಸ!ಾಜದ ನನB ಮkಾl ೆ ೊRತು ಎಂದು
‰ಂSೆ3ೊಳ3ಾದ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 06-10-2024 ರಂದು ೆಳ@ನ „ಾ ಾ 03:00 ಗಂIೆಯ
ಸು!ಾ 3ೆ ಮ<ೆRಂದ ತನB 7ಾರನುB ಚ&ಾRN7ೊಂಡು ಬಂದವರು 1 ಂದ 6 ರವ)ೆ@ನ
ಆ)ೋOತರುಗಳ8 ಪ ೇ ಪ ೇ ಹಣ7ಾb@ ಮತುC ತನB )ಾm<ಾ=3ೆ #ಂKೆ MೕಡುವWದನುB
ಮುಂದುವ)ೆNದA ಂದ ಇನುB ಮುಂದ7ೆb ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ತನBನುB ಸ!ಾಜದ 3ೌರವಯುತ ಾ@
ಾಳಲು ಡುವWEಲ ೆಂದು Mಧl N7ೊಂಡು ಈ ಆ)ೋOತರ ^ರುಕುಳEಂದ ೊರಬರಲು
Kಾಧ; ಾಗ ೇ ಆ)ೋOತ ಂದ 7ೊ&ೆkಾ@ KಾಯುವWದ^bಂತ ಆತ ಹSೆ;"ಂ ೆ ಾ --ಂದು
"ೕ‰N ಮ<ೆRಂದ ಕೂಳ/ರು ,¤ ತಲುಪWವವ)ೆ3ೆ ತನB 2 ೈ$ 'ೕ" ಾIಾ%} ಮು•ೇ<ಾ
Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ 1,2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11 ಮತುC 13 <ೇ ಯವ 3ೆ ತನB ಮರಣ7ೆb 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ಮತುC 6 <ೇ
ಆ)ೋOತರ 3ಾ;ಂ™ ೇ3ೆ 7ಾರಣ ಾ@ ೆ ಎಂದು >ವರ5ೆ ಇರುವ ಆT"ೕ ಾ¥% =KೇD ಗಳನುB
ಮರಣ7ೆb ಪ9ವlದ ಾIಾ%} ಾR( =ೕKೆD ಮು•ಾಂತರ ಕಳ8#NದುA, ಆ)ೋOತರ ಕೃತ;ಗGಂದ
ಸ!ಾಜದ Sಾನು 3ೌರವಯುತ ಾ@ ಬದುಕಲು ಆKಾಧ; ಾ@ Vೕ)ಾ ಮನ<ೊಂದು !ಾನNಕ ಾ@ ಕು@H
ೋದ ಮು!ಾCD ಆ ಯವರು ತನB 7ಾರನುB ,¤ =ೕ&ೆ M N E<ಾಂಕ:
E<ಾಂಕ 06-10-2024 ರಂದು
ೆಳ@ನ „ಾವ 04.25 ಗಂIೆಯ
ಗಂIೆಯ ಸು!ಾ 3ೆ ಕೂಳ/ರು ಬGಯ ಫಲುHo ನE3ೆ ಾ ಆತ ಹSೆ;
!ಾT7ೊಂTದುA ಇದ7ೆb 1 ಂದ 6 ರವ)ೆ@ನ ಆ)ೋOತರುಗಳ8 7ಾರoಕತl)ಾ@ರುSಾC)ೆ.ೆ
26
ಈ ಪ ಕರಣದ 1 <ೇ ಆ\ಾESೆಯು ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರನುB 7ೊ&ೆ !ಾT ಸು 3ೆ
!ಾಡುವ ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಅಕ ಮ ಕೂಟ Kೇ N7ೊಂಡು, ಒಳಸಂಚು ರೂON, 1 <ೇ
ಅ\ಾESೆ"ಂE@ನ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಬ3ೆH ಅಪಪ Qಾರ !ಾT, Mರಂತರ ಾ@ 2,3,4,5, ಮತುC 6 <ೇ
ಆ\ಾEತ)ೊಂE3ೆ Kೇ ಬಲವಂತ ಾ@ ಸ!ಾಜದ , Kಾrನ!ಾನ 3ೌರವವನುB ಕ?ೆದು, ಅವ!ಾMN,
ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಮNೕE ಅಧ;n ಪದ>3ೆ )ಾmೕ<ಾ= 7ೊಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು Mರಂತರ ಾ@ ೈ#ಕ ಮತುC
!ಾನNಕ #ಂKೆ MೕT, ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ !ಾT ೆದ N, ಕೂT ಾ^ 7ೈRಂದ ಹ&ೆ !ಾT ಹಣ ಾಗೂ
ವಸುCಗಳನುB ಸು 3ೆ !ಾT, ಅ ಾಚ; ಶಬAಗGಂದ ೈದು, mೕವ ೆದ 7ೆ ಾ^ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು
ಆತ ಹSೆ; !ಾT7ೊಳxಲು 7ಾರಣಕತl)ಾ@ದುA ಕಲಂ: 308(2), 308(5), 352, 351(2), 61(2),
140(2), 108 „ೊSೆ3ೆ 190 .ಎ".ಎ( ೕSಾ; ಅಪ)ಾಧವನುB ಎKೆ@ದುA
2<ೇ ಆ)ೋOತನು ಮೃತ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು 7ೊ&ೆ !ಾT ಸು 3ೆ !ಾಡುವ ಸ!ಾನ
ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ಅಕ ಮ ಕೂಟ Kೇ N7ೊಂಡು,ಒಳಸಂಚು ರೂON, 1 <ೇ ಅ\ಾESೆ"ಂE@ನ ಸಂಬಂಧದ
ಬ3ೆH ಅಪಪ Qಾರ !ಾT, Mರಂತರ ಾ@ 1,3,4,5, ಮತುC 6 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತ)ೊಂE3ೆ Kೇ ಬಲವಂತ ಾ@
ಸ!ಾಜದ Kಾrನ!ಾನ 3ೌರವವನುB ಕ?ೆದು, ಅವ!ಾMN, ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಮNೕE ಅಧ;n
ಪದ>3ೆ )ಾmೕ<ಾ= 7ೊಡ ೇ7ೆಂದು Mರಂತರ ಾ@ ೈ#ಕ ಮತುC !ಾನNಕ #ಂKೆ MೕT, ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ
!ಾT, ೆದ N, ಕೂT ಾ^ 7ೈRಂದ ಹ&ೆ !ಾT ಹಣ ಾಗೂ ವಸುCಗಳನುB ಸು 3ೆ !ಾT, ಅ ಾಚ;
ಶಬAಗGಂದ ೈದು, mೕವ ೆದ 7ೆ ಾ^ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯು ಆತ ಹSೆ; !ಾT7ೊಳxಲು
7ಾರಣಕತl)ಾ@ದುA ಕಲಂ: 308(2), 308(5), 54, 61(2), 140(2), 108 „ೊSೆ3ೆ 190 .ಎ".ಎ(
ಕಲಂ ೕSಾ; ಅಪ)ಾಧವನುB ಎKೆ@ದುA
3,4,5 ಮತುC 6 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರುಗಳ8 ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ 7ೊ&ೆ !ಾT ಸು 3ೆ !ಾಡುವ
ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ ಹಣ7ಾb@ ದು...ೆ•ೕ
ದು...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆ
...ೆ•ೕರ5ೆ MೕT,
MೕT ಅಕ ಮ ಕೂಟ Kೇ 7ೊಂಡು,
7ೊಂಡು ಒಳಸಂಚು ನzೆN7ೊಂಡು 1 ಮತುC
2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತರ ಉ ೆAೕಶವನುB ಈzೇ ಸಲು ಾಗೂ ತಮ3ೆ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯ =ೕ&ೆ ಇದA ೆjೕಷEಂದ
1 ಮತುC 2 <ೇ ಆ\ಾEತ 3ೆ ಬ&ಾದH¡ಹಣ ಹಣದ ಮೂಲಕ ನzೆಸುವ ಸು 3ೆಯ ಸ!ಾನ Ÿಾ@ಗ?ಾ@
ಆ§lಕ &ಾಭ ಪzೆದು7ೊಳxಲು ಾಗೂ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಮತುC Qಾ.Kಾ
Qಾ Kಾ-2
Kಾ <ೇಯವರ ನಡSೆಯನುB
ಅವ!ಾMN KಾವlಜMಕ ಾ@ ಅವಮkಾl ೆ !ಾಡಲು ಸ!ಾನ ಉ ೆAೕಶEಂದ ದು...ೆ•ೕ
ದು...ೆ•ೕ N ಕೃತ;ವನುB
ಮುಂದುವ)ೆNದ ಪ 5ಾಮ ಮು!ಾCD ಅ ಯವರು ಆತ ಹSೆ; !ಾT7ೊಳxಲು ಆ\ಾEತ)ಾದ 1 ಮತುC 2
<ೇಯವ)ೊಂE3ೆ Mರಂತರ ಾ@ ಅಪ)ಾ6ಕ ಒಳಸಂಚು !ಾT ದು...ೆ•ೕ
ದು...ೆ•ೕ Nದ ಪ 5ಾಮ ಮು!ಾCD
ಅ ಯು ಆತ ಹSೆ; !ಾT7ೊಂTದುA ಆ)ೋOತರು ಕಲಂ 108, 50, 61(2), 140(2) „ೊSೆ3ೆ 190
ಎ".ಎ(
ಎ" ಎ( ರಂSೆ ಅಪ)ಾಧ ೆಸ@ರುSಾC)ೆ ಎಂಬು ಾ@ ಸ ಸ&ಾದ ೋ...ಾ)ೋಪಣ ಪ†a"
.ಎ" ಪ†a"
(Emphasis added)
27
The allegations vary from offences punishable under Sections
308(2), 308(5), 352, 351(2), 50, 54, 61(2), 140(2), 108 read with
190 of the BNS. I deem it appropriate to notice the provisions on
which the offences are alleged. They read as follows:
"50. Punishment of abetment if person abetted does
act with different intention from that of abettor.--Whoever
abets the commission of an offence shall, if the person abetted
does the act with a different intention or knowledge from that of
the abettor, be punished with the punishment provided for the
offence which would have been committed if the act had been
done with the intention or knowledge of the abettor and with no
other.
... ... ...
54. Abettor present when offence is committed.--
Whenever any person, who is absent would be liable to
be punished as an abettor, is present when the act or
offence for which he would be punishable in consequence
of the abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have
committed such act or offence.
... ... ...
61. Criminal conspiracy.--(1) .. ..
..
(2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy,–
(a) to commit an offence punishable with
death, imprisonment for life or rigorous
imprisonment for a term of two years or
upwards, shall, where no express provision
is made in this Sanhita for the punishment
of such a conspiracy, be punished in the
same manner as if he had abetted such
offence;
(b) other than a criminal conspiracy to commit
an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be
28
punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term not exceeding six
months, or with fine or with both.
… … …
108. Abetment of suicide.–If any person commits
suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
… … …
140. Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder or
for ransom, etc.–(1) … … …
(2) Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person or
keeps a person in detention after such kidnapping or
abduction, and threatens to cause death or hurt to such
person, or by his conduct gives rise to a reasonable
apprehension that such person may be put to death or
hurt, or causes hurt or death to such person in order to
compel the Government or any foreign State or
international inter-governmental organisation or any
other person to do or abstain from doing any act or to pay
a ransom, shall be punishable with death, or
imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
… … …
190. Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of
offence committed in prosecution of common object.–If
an offence is committed by any member of an unlawful
assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly,
or such as the members of that assembly knew to be likely to be
committed in prosecution of that object, every person who, at
the time of the committing of that offence, is a member of the
same assembly, is guilty of that offence.
... ... ...
308. Extortion.--(1) ... ...
(2) Whoever commits extortion shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
… … …
(5) Whoever commits extortion by putting any person in
fear of death or of grievous hurt to that person or to any other,
29
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to
fine.
... ... ...
351. Criminal intimidation.--(1) ... ...
(2) Whoever commits the offence of criminal intimidation
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a
term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
… … …
352. Intentional insult with intent to provoke
breach of peace.–Whoever intentionally insults in any
manner, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending
or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to
break the public peace, or to commit any other offence, shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.”
Section 54 of the BNS punishes an abettor who is present
when the offence is committed. Section 61(2) deals with
punishment for criminal conspiracy. Section 140(2) deals with
kidnapping for a ransom as was obtaining under Section 364A of
the IPC, the earlier regime. Section 308(2) deals with extortion.
Section 308(5) deals with extortion by putting a person in a fear of
death or grievous hurt. Section 190 deals with unlawful assembly
in execution of a common object. Above all, the alleged offence
under Section 108 of the BNS punishes a person who abets
commission of suicide.
30
12. If the complaint and the summary of charge sheet as
extracted hereinabove are noticed, what would unmistakably
emerge is, that the case is shrouded with seriously disputed
questions of fact. The complainant registers the complaint on
06-10-2024, hands over the mobile phone of the deceased on
13-10-2024 and speaks about harassment of accused No.1 to the
deceased and their relationship and the voice message from the
deceased, which also indicates a cheque being handed over to
accused No.1 for a sum of ₹25/- lakhs on demand of ₹50/- lakhs.
The wife of the deceased one Rehana speaks about relationship of
the deceased with accused No.1 and she comes to know of their
relationship on 13-04-2024. The squabble arose between them
early on 04-04-2024. Accused No.1 later on demanded
compensation and had also asked the deceased to resign from the
post of President and threatened to file a complaint before the
Masjid. This is noticed in the WhatsApp voice recording of the
deceased. There are several witnesses, who spoke about the
enmity between the deceased and accused No.3 with regard to
masjid administration and other acts of threatening with regard to
administration in the masjid as also the relationship between
31
accused No.1 and the deceased. Accused No.1 one Smt. Rehamath
is not said to have had a relationship with the deceased. When all
these allegations are so shrouded in the realm of seriously disputed
questions of fact, it is ununderstandable as to how this Court can
interfere in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C., at this stage. It is undoubtedly a case for trial. A life is
lost, not on ordinary terms but on serious allegations which are
recorded by the deceased at the time of commission of suicide.
This cannot be brushed aside and the crime cannot be obliterated at
this juncture.
13. Jurisprudence is replete with the judgments of the Apex
Court as to the interference in a case of commission of suicide as
obtaining under Section 108 of the BNS or Section 306 of the IPC,
the earlier regime. The Apex Court holds that if ingredients of
Section 107 of the IPC are not met in an allegation of an offence
under Section 306 of the IPC, the Court has to interfere and
obliterate the proceedings. In the event it does make out an offence
of abetment, the Court must hold its hands in terminating the
proceedings at the nascent stage. It therefore, becomes necessary
32
to notice what is abetment. For an offence to become punishable
under Section 108 of the BNS, the abetment must have happened
as obtaining under Section 45 of the BNS, which is Section 107 of
the earlier regime, IPC. Section 45 of the BNS reads as follows:
“45. Abetment of a thing.–A person abets the doing
of a thing, who–
(a) instigates any person to do that thing; or
(b) engages with one or more other person or persons
in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an
act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of
that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that
thing; or
(c) intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the
doing of that thing.
Explanation 1.–A person who, by wilful
misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact
which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or
attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to
instigate the doing of that thing.
Illustration
A, a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a court
to apprehend Z. B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z,
wilfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally
causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the
apprehension of C.
Explanation 2.–Whoever, either prior to or at the time of
the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the
commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission
thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.”
33
In terms of Section 45 of the BNS, a person is said to have
abeted doing of a thing, if a person would instigate any person to
do a particular thing or engages with one or more person in a
conspiracy for doing that thing or intentionally aid by an act or
illegal omission for doing that thing. If the complaint so registered,
the statements recorded and the charge sheet drawn against the
accused are noticed, they prima facie meet the ingredients of
abetment as obtaining under Section 45 of the BNS supra.
14. It is now germane to notice the judicial canvass of
whether prima facie ingredients of the offence under Section 45 of
the BNS/107 of the IPC are met.
JUDICIAL CANVASS:
15. The Apex Court in the case of RAJEEV KOURAV v.
BAISAHAB1, has held as follows:
“…. …. ….
6. The High Court summoned the record of investigation
and perused the statements recorded by the appellant and his
family members under Section 161 CrPC. The High Court held
that statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC would show
that Respondent 1 is a quarrelsome lady who has threatened
1
(2020) 3 SCC 317
34
the appellant’s family of false implication in a criminal case. The
High Court observed that none of the persons whose statements
under Section 161 CrPC were recorded have mentioned about
the complaint of the deceased and that she was thinking of
committing suicide due to the harassment of Respondents 1 to
3. The High Court recorded a finding that RamsharanKourav, the
uncle of the deceased, has stated in his statement under
Section 161 that the deceased informed him that she is unable
to bear the torture of Respondents 1 to 3 and was thinking of
putting an end to her life.
7. The High Court observed that the allegations made
against Respondents 1 to 3 at the most constitute an offence
under Section 506 IPC for criminal intimidation. Read as a
whole, the allegations made against Respondents 1 to 3 did not
make out an offence under Sections 306/34 IPC. The High Court
further held that ingredients of Section 107 IPC are also not
satisfied. In that view, the petition filed by Respondents 1 to 3
for quashing the criminal proceeding was allowed.
8. It is no more res integra that exercise of power
under Section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding is
only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge-
sheet constitutes the ingredients of the offence/offences
alleged. Interference by the High Court under Section 482
CrPC is to prevent the abuse of process of any court or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is settled law
that the evidence produced by the accused in his defence
cannot be looked into by the court, except in very
exceptional circumstances, at the initial stage of the
criminal proceedings. It is trite law that the High Court
cannot embark upon the appreciation of evidence while
considering the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC for
quashing criminal proceedings. It is clear from the law
laid down by this Court that if a prima facie case is made
out disclosing the ingredients of the offence alleged
against the accused, the Court cannot quash a criminal
proceeding.
9. Mr Shoeb Alam, learned counsel appearing for
Respondents 1 to 3, relied upon several judgments of this Court
to submit that allegations only disclose a case of harassment
meted out to the deceased. The ingredients of Sections 306 and
35
107 IPC have not been made out. It is submitted that there is
nothing on record to show that the respondents have abetted
the commission of suicide by the deceased. He further argued
that abetment as defined under Section 107 IPC is
instigation which is missing in the complaint made by the
appellant. He further argued that if the allegations
against Respondents 1 to 3 are not prima facie made out,
there is no reason why they should face a criminal trial.
10. We do not agree with the submissions made on
behalf of Respondents 1 to 3. The conclusion of the High
Court to quash the criminal proceedings is on the basis of
its assessment of the statements recorded under Section
161 CrPC. Statements of witnesses recorded under
Section 161 CrPC being wholly inadmissible in evidence
cannot be taken into consideration by the Court, while
adjudicating a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC
[Rajendra Singh v. State of U.P., (2007) 7 SCC 378 :
(2007) 3 SCC (Cri) 375] .
11. Moreover, the High Court was aware that one of the
witnesses mentioned that the deceased informed him about the
harassment meted out by Respondents 1 to 3 which she was not
able to bear and hence wanted to commit suicide. The High
Court committed an error in quashing criminal
proceedings by assessing the statements under Section
161 CrPC.”
15.1. The Apex Court in the case of MAHENDRA K.C. v.
STATE OF KARNATAKA2, has held as follows:
“…. …. ….
16. On reading the judgment [L. Bheema Naik v. State of
Karnataka, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3395] of the Single Judge, it
would appear that the Single Judge has failed to notice the
distinction between a petition for quashing under Section 482
(which was being considered) and a criminal trial or an appeal
2
(2022) 2 SCC 129
36
against a conviction on a charge under Section 306. The Single
Judge has transgressed the limits of the jurisdiction under
Section 482 CrPC. The judgment is replete with hypotheses and
surmises on the basis of which the Single Judge has reached an
inference on facts. The Single Judge has tested the veracity of
the allegations in the criminal complaint and in the suicide note
left behind by the deceased without having the benefit of an
evidentiary record which would be collected during the trial. At
the stage when the High Court considers a petition for
quashing under Section 482 CrPC, the test to be applied is
whether the allegations in the complaint as they stand,
without adding or detracting from the complaint, prima
facie establish the ingredients of the offence alleged. At
this stage, the High Court cannot test the veracity of the
allegations nor for that matter can it proceed in the
manner that a Judge conducting a trial would, on the
basis of the evidence collected during the course of trial.
The High Court in the present case has virtually proceeded to
hold a trial, substituting its own perception for what it believed
should or should not have been the normal course of human
behaviour. This is clearly impermissible.
17. The complaint in the present case on the basis of
which the FIR was registered contains a detailed account of:
(i) The knowledge of the deceased in regard to the
illegal activities of the accused;
(ii) The accused having used the deceased’s bank
account for transfer of funds to his relatives;
(iii) The deceased having been threatened by the
accused and by his “house car driver” with death;
and
(iv) The recovery of the suicide note which was also
uploaded on the Facebook account of the deceased.
The suicide note in turn provides a detailed account of–
(a) The wealth amassed by the second respondent-
accused who was an SLAO, worth over Rs 100
crores;
37
(b) The second respondent-accused having converted
approximately Rs 100 crores into currency notes of
various denominations;
(c) The knowledge of the deceased with respect the
illegal activities of the accused;
(d) The accused having used the deceased for the
conversion of currency notes amounting to over Rs
75 crores;
(e) The payment of the salary of the deceased, who was
a driver having been stopped for three months;
(f) A threat of murder being administered to the
deceased following a shortage in the currency; and
(g) The deceased having decided to end his life by
consuming poison, having suffered at the hands of
the accused.
18. In this backdrop, it is impossible on a judicious
purview of the contents of the complaint and the suicide note for
a judicial mind to arrive at a conclusion that a case for quashing
the FIR had been established. In arriving at that conclusion, the
Single Judge has transgressed the well-settled limitations on the
exercise of the powers under Section 482 CrPC and has
encroached into a territory which is reserved for a criminal trial.
19. The High Court has the power under Section
482 to issue such orders as are necessary to prevent the
abuse of legal process or otherwise, to secure the ends of
justice. The law on the exercise of power under Section
482 to quash an FIR is well-settled. In State of
Orissa v. Saroj Kumar Sahoo [State of Orissa v. Saroj Kumar
Sahoo, (2005) 13 SCC 540 : (2006) 2 SCC (Cri) 272] , a two-
Judge Bench of this Court, observed that : (SCC pp. 547-48,
para 8)
“8. … While exercising the powers under the
section, the court does not function as a court of
appeal or revision. Inherent jurisdiction under the
38
section though wide has to be exercised sparingly,
carefully and with caution and only when such
exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid
down in the section itself. It is to be exercised ex
debito justitiae to do real and substantial justice for the
administration of which alone the courts exist. Authority
of the court exists for advancement of justice and if any
attempt is made to abuse that authority so as to
produce injustice, the court has power to prevent abuse.
It would be an abuse of process of the court to allow any
action which would result in injustice and prevent
promotion of justice. In exercise of the powers the
court would be justified to quash any proceeding if
it finds that initiation/continuance of it amounts to
abuse of the process of court or quashing of these
proceedings would otherwise serve the ends of
justice. When no offence is disclosed by the
report, the court may examine the question of
fact. When a report is sought to be quashed, it is
permissible to look into the materials to assess
what the report has alleged and whether any
offence is made out even if the allegations are
accepted in toto.”
20. These principles emanate from the decisions of this
Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [State of
Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri)
426] and State of M.P. v. Surendra Kori [State of
M.P. v. Surendra Kori, (2012) 10 SCC 155 : (2012) 4 SCC (Civ)
921 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 247 : (2012) 2 SCC (L&S) 940] .
In Surendra Kori [State of M.P. v. Surendra Kori, (2012) 10 SCC
155 : (2012) 4 SCC (Civ) 921 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 247 : (2012)
2 SCC (L&S) 940] , this Court observed : (Surendra Kori
case [State of M.P. v. Surendra Kori, (2012) 10 SCC 155 :
(2012) 4 SCC (Civ) 921 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 247 : (2012) 2
SCC (L&S) 940] , SCC p. 163, para 14)“14. The High Court in exercise of its powers
under Section 482 CrPC does not function as a
court of appeal or revision. This Court has, in
several judgments, held that the inherent
jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, though wide,
has to be used sparingly, carefully and with
caution. The High Court, under Section 482 CrPC,
should normally refrain from giving a prima facie
39decision in a case where the entire facts are
incomplete and hazy, more so when the evidence
has not been collected and produced before the
Court and the issues involved, whether factual or
legal, are of wide magnitude and cannot be seen in
their true perspective without sufficient material.”
21. In Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992
Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] , this Court laid down
the principles for the exercise of the jurisdiction by the High
Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash
an FIR. Ratnavel Pandian, J. laid down the limits on the exercise
of the power under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the FIR and
observed : (SCC pp. 378-79, para 102)
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the
various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter
XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court
in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent
powers under Section 482 CrPC which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we give the following
categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such
power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any
precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an
exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such
power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety
do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a
case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information
report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR
do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers under Section 156(1)
CrPC except under an order of a Magistrate within the
purview of Section 155(2) CrPC.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made
in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in
40
support of the same do not disclose the commission of
any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not
constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a
non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by
a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as
contemplated under Section 155(2) CrPC.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or
complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on
the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a
just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted
in any of the provisions of the Code or the Act concerned
(under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the
institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or
where there is a specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the
grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly
attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is
maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to
spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
The judgment in Bhajan Lal [State of Haryana v. Bhajan
Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426] has been
recently relied on by this Court in State of
Telangana v. Managipet [State of Telangana v. Managipet,
(2019) 19 SCC 87 : (2020) 3 SCC (Cri) 702] .
22. Based on the above precedent, the High Court
while exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC to
quash the FIR instituted against the second respondent-
accused should have applied the following two tests : (i)
whether the allegations made in the complaint, prima
facie constitute an offence; and (ii) whether the
allegations are so improbable that a prudent man would
not arrive at the conclusion that there is sufficient ground
to proceed with the complaint. Before proceeding further, it
is imperative to briefly discuss the law on the abetment of
41
suicide to determine if a prima facie case under Section 306 IPC
has been made out against the respondent-accused.
23. Section 306 IPC provides for punishment of the
abetment of suicide:
“306. Abetment of suicide.–If any person
commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such
suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to ten years,
and shall also be liable to fine.”
Section 107 IPC defines the expression “abetment”:
“107. Abetment of a thing.–A person abets
the doing of a thing, who–
First.–Instigates any person to do that thing; or
Secondly.–Engages with one or more other
person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that
thing, if an act or illegal omission lakes place in
pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing
of that thing; orThirdly.–Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal
omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1.–A person who by wilful
misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a
material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily
causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a
thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that
thing.”
24. The essence of abetment lies in instigating a person
to do a thing or the intentional doing of that thing by an act or
illegal omission. In Ramesh Kumar v. State of
Chhattisgarh [Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9
SCC 618 : 2002 SCC (Cri) 1088] , a three-Judge Bench of this
Court, speaking through R.C. Lahoti, J. (as the learned Chief
Justice then was), observed : (SCC p. 629, para 20)
“20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward,
provoke, incite or encourage to do “an act”. To satisfy
42
the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary
that actual words must be used to that effect or what
constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically
be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable
certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of
being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the
accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued
course of conduct created such circumstances that the
deceased was left with no other option except to commit
suicide in which case an instigation may have been
inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion
without intending the consequences to actually follow
cannot be said to be instigation.”
25. A two-Judge Bench of this Court in Chitresh Kumar
Chopra v. State (NCT of Delhi) [Chitresh Kumar Chopra v. State
(NCT of Delhi), (2009) 16 SCC 605 : (2010) 3 SCC (Cri) 367] ,
speaking through D.K. Jain, J., observed : (SCC pp. 611-12,
paras 19-20)
“19. As observed in Ramesh Kumar [Ramesh
Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 9 SCC 618 :
2002 SCC (Cri) 1088] , where the accused by his acts or
by a continued course of conduct creates such
circumstances that the deceased was left with no other
option except to commit suicide, an “instigation” may be
inferred. In other words, in order to prove that the
accused abetted commission of suicide by a person, it
has to be established that:
(i) the accused kept on irritating or annoying the
deceased by words, deeds or wilful omission or conduct
which may even be a wilful silence until the deceased
reacted or pushed or forced the deceased by his deeds,
words or wilful omission or conduct to make the
deceased move forward more quickly in a forward
direction; and
(ii) that the accused had the intention to
provoke, urge or encourage the deceased to commit
suicide while acting in the manner noted above.
Undoubtedly, presence of mens rea is the necessary
concomitant of instigation.
20. In the background of this legal position, we
may advert to the case at hand. The question as to what
43
is the cause of a suicide has no easy answers because
suicidal ideation and behaviours in human beings are
complex and multifaceted. Different individuals in the
same situation react and behave differently because of
the personal meaning they add to each event, thus
accounting for individual vulnerability to suicide. Each
individual’s suicidality pattern depends on his inner
subjective experience of mental pain, fear and loss of
self-respect. Each of these factors are crucial and
exacerbating contributor to an individual’s vulnerability
to end his own life, which may either be an attempt for
self-protection or an escapism from intolerable self.”
(emphasis in original)
26. This has been reiterated in the decision in Amalendu
Pal v. State of W.B. [Amalendu Pal v. State of W.B., (2010) 1
SCC 707 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 896] , where it has been
observed : (SCC p. 712, para 12)
“12. … It is also to be borne in mind that in cases
of alleged abetment of suicide there must be proof of
direct or indirect acts of incitement to the commission of
suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without
there being any positive action proximate to the time of
occurrence on the part of the accused which led or
compelled the person to commit suicide, conviction in
terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable.”
(See also in this context the judgments in Praveen
Pradhan v. State of Uttaranchal [Praveen Pradhan v. State of
Uttaranchal, (2012) 9 SCC 734 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 146]
, VaijnathKondibaKhandke v. State of
Maharashtra [VaijnathKondibaKhandke v. State of Maharashtra,
(2018) 7 SCC 781 : (2018) 3 SCC (Cri) 362] , M.
Arjunan v. State [M. Arjunan v. State, (2019) 3 SCC 315 :
(2019) 2 SCC (Cri) 219] , Ude Singh v. State of Haryana [Ude
Singh v. State of Haryana, (2019) 17 SCC 301 : (2020) 3 SCC
(Cri) 306] , Rajesh v. State of Haryana [Rajesh v. State of
Haryana, (2020) 15 SCC 359 : (2020) 4 SCC (Cri) 75]
and Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab [Gurcharan
Singh v. State of Punjab, (2020) 10 SCC 200 : (2021) 1 SCC
(Cri) 417] . These decisions have been recently referred to in
the judgment of this Court in Arnab Manoranjan
44Goswami v. State of Maharashtra [Arnab Manoranjan
Goswami v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 2 SCC 427 : (2021) 1
SCC (Cri) 834] ).
27. While adjudicating on an application under Section
482 CrPC, the High Court in the present case travelled far away
from the parameters for the exercise of the jurisdiction.
Essentially, the task before the High Court was to
determine whether the allegations made in the first
information report or the complaint, even if they are
taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety
did or did not prima facie constitute an offence or make
out a case against the accused.
28. Instead of applying this settled principle, the
High Court has proceeded to analyse from its own
perspective the veracity of the allegations. It must be
emphasised that this is not a case where the High Court
has arrived at a conclusion that the allegations in the FIR
or the complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable
on the basis of which no prudent person could ever reach
a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused. Nor is this a case where
the criminal proceeding is manifestly mala fide or has
been instituted with an ulterior motive of taking
vengeance on the accused. On the contrary, the specific
allegations in the FIR and in the complaint find due
reflection in the suicide note and establish a prima facie
case for abetment of suicide within the meaning of
Sections 306 and 107 IPC.The entire judgment [L.
Bheema Naik v. State of Karnataka, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar
3395] of the High Court consists of a litany of surmises
and conjectures and such an exercise is beyond the
domain of proceeding under Section 482 CrPC. The High
Court has proceeded to scrutinise what has been
disclosed during the investigation, ignoring that the
investigation had been stayed by an interim order of the
High Court, during the pendency of the proceedings under
Section 482.
29. The High Court observed that a prima facie case
for the commission of offence under Section 306 IPC is
not made out since : (i) the suicide note does not
45
describe the specific threats; (ii) details of the alleged
demand of Rs 8 lakhs from the deceased by the
respondent-accused are not set out in the suicide note;
and (iii) no material to corroborate the allegations
detailed in the suicide note has been unearthed by the
investigating agency. The High Court observed that since
the deceased took considerable time to write a twelve
page suicide note, “it would have been but natural for the
author to set out the details”. The High Court has
evidently travelled far beyond the limits of its inherent
power under Section 482 CrPC since instead of
determining whether on a perusal of the complaint, a
prima facie case is made out, it has analysed the
sufficiency of the evidence with reference to the suicide
note and has commented upon and made strong
observations on the suicide note itself.
30. Paras 32, 33, 34 and 39 of the order [L. Bheema
Naik v. State of Karnataka, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3395] of the
High Court are extracted below : (L. Bheema Naik case [L.
Bheema Naik v. State of Karnataka, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3395]
, SCC OnLine Kar)
“32. In Para 21 [of the suicide/death note] [Ed. :
As per para 31 of the impugned judgment of the High
Court in L. Bheema Naik case, it is recorded as
follows:”… The deceased has written a detailed death
note consisting of 21 numbered and one unnumbered
paragraphs. Out of 22 paragraphs, 20 paragraphs
pertain to alleged dealings and the only probable portion
of the death note, which could be relied upon to
establish the culpability of the petitioner are Para 21….”]
, a bald statement is made stating that because he is
aware of all the above transaction, he was given a death
threat. In the next sentence, he states that he has been
psychologically/emotionally in trouble and hence, he is
consuming poison and that the petitioner and his driver
alone are responsible. For a person, who has detailed 20
transactions, it can be prudently expected of such a
person to give details of the threat.
33. In the next unnumbered paragraph, a totally
different story/note is set out as a reason for the
petitioner threatening the deceased. In the unnumbered
paragraph, he states that there was shortage in the cash
46
to the tune of Rs 8 lakhs and that the petitioner
suspected him as being responsible for the same and
hence, threatened him that if the deceased did not
repay said Rs 8 lakhs, he would have the deceased killed
at the hands of rowdies. Thereafter, in the next
sentence he states that in view of the same, he has
decided to consume poison and that the petitioner and
his driver are responsible for the same.
34. In Para 20 [of the suicide/death note], the
deceased holds the petitioner responsible for withholding
the salary for the last three months. The other
paragraphs including Para 20 [of the suicide/death note]
detail the properties said to have been amassed by the
petitioner and other illegal transactions. After having
perused and scrutinised the death note, a query was put
to the learned High Court Government Pleader and the
counsel appearing on behalf of 2nd respondent as to
whether the investigation has thrown up any material
that corroborates any of the allegations set out in the
death note. The learned High Court Government Pleader
would fairly submit that they have not been able
unearth any material to corroborate any of the
allegations.
***
39. As discussed above, the death note contains
no incriminating statement or material except for a bald
and vague statement but that the accused had
threatened him. Even the complaint does not disclose
any details of the alleged threat nor does the complaint
state that the deceased had on multiple occasions
complained of having received threats from accused.
Even the allegation of the demand for repayment of Rs 8
lakhs rings hollow as neither the prosecution nor the de
facto complainant have been able to place an iota of
material that the deceased was or had in fact been in
possession of huge sum of money.”
Further, the observation of the High Court that there
is no material to corroborate the allegations made in the
suicide note is erroneous since it is not a consideration
for the High Court while exercising its power under
Section 482 CrPC, particularly in view of the fact that the
47
trial has not begun and the Single Judge had stayed the
investigation in the criminal complaint.
31. The Single Judge, other than deciding on the merits
of the case while exercising the power under Section 482 CrPC,
has also made observations diminishing the importance of
mental health. The mental health of a person cannot be
compressed into a one-size-fits-all approach. In para 37 of the
impugned judgment [L. Bheema Naik v. State of Karnataka,
2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3395] , the Single Judge observed : (L.
Bheema Naik case [L. Bheema Naik v. State of Karnataka, 2020
SCC OnLine Kar 3395] , SCC OnLine Kar)
“37. It is not the case of the deceased that the
accused had deprived him of his wealth or have
committed acts that have shattered his hopes in life or
separated him from his family and friends.”
The Single Judge then makes the following observation in
paras 41 and 43 : (L. Bheema Naik case [L. Bheema
Naik v. State of Karnataka, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3395] , SCC
OnLine Kar)
“41. … It is not the case of the prosecution that
the deceased was running away from or escaping the
petitioner or his henchmen, but as is his habit, to visit
his parents and to spend time with his friends. If the
deceased had really felt threatened, he would have
definitely approached the police. It is not that he was
naive or not worldly-wise. If his employment with the
petitioner was true, then the Police Commissionerate
was only a stone’s throw away. It is not that the
deceased was a weakling. The deceased by profession,
is a driver. A profession where, accidents causing loss of
life and limb are a daily occurrence and every driver is
aware that he could be involved in an accident at any
time.
***
43. His act of attending a relatives marriage in a
different town and his interacting with friends and
relatives are all actions of a normal person and not of a
person under severe duress. The contention that this
criminal case would jeopardise his career progression
also cannot be brushed aside. It is also not forthcoming
as to how he sourced the poison.”
48
32. The Single Judge has termed a person who decided to
commit suicide a “weakling” and has also made observations on
how the behaviour of the deceased before he committed suicide
was not that of a person who is depressed and suffering from
mental health issues. Behavioural scientists have initiated the
discourse on the heterogeneity of every individual and have
challenged the traditional notion of “all humans behave alike”.
Individual personality differences manifest as a variation in the
behaviour of people. Therefore, how an individual copes up with
a threat–both physical and emotional, expressing (or refraining
to express) love, loss, sorrow and happiness, varies greatly in
view of the multi-faceted nature of the human mind and
emotions. Thus, the observations describing the manner in
which a depressed person ought to have behaved deeply
diminishes the gravity of mental health issues.
33. The High Court by its order [L. Bheema
Naik v. State of Karnataka, 2020 SCC OnLine Kar 3395]
has prevented the completion of the investigation in the
complaint registered as Crime No. 565 of 2016 pending
on the file of the IInd Additional Civil Judge (Junior
Division) and JMFC Court, Maddur, Mandya District. The
alleged suicide is of a person who was working as a
driver of a Special Land Acquisition Officer, who is a
public servant and against whom serious and grave
allegations of amassing wealth disproportionate to the
known sources of income were made by the deceased.
The suicide note contains a detailed account of the role of
the accused in the events which led to the deceased
committing suicide. These are matters of investigation
and possibly trial. The High Court stalled the
investigation by granting an interim order of stay. If the
investigation had been allowed to proceed, there would
have been a revelation of material facts which would aid
in the trial, for the alleged offence against the second
respondent.”
49
15.2. The Apex Court in the case of SHAKUNTLA DEVI v.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH3, has held as follows:
“…. …. ….
8. The most relevant statement for consideration is
that of PW-3, Sandeep Kumar, younger brother of the
deceased who was aged around 17 years at the time of
incident and was with the deceased in the days leading up
to the incident. He has stated that on 01.05.1998, he had
accompanied his deceased sister to her matrimonial home
and stayed with her for the following days. It has been
stated by him that on the day of the incident, in the
forenoon of 04.05.1998, his deceased sister had cooked
rice and the appellant abused the deceased about the way
the rice was cooked, then threw the food cooked by the
deceased. Thereafter, on the same day again at about
4.30/5.00 p.m., the appellant-accused abused the
deceased. At the time, there was no one else in the house
except PW-3, the deceased and the accused. Thereafter,
PW-3 was sent by the accused to call Raju. When PW-3
came back to her sister’s house, he saw that the accused
was shouting that her daughter-in-law, i.e. the deceased,
had consumed something. Then, the appellant along with
three other persons carried the deceased to the hospital
while PW-3 was asked to stay back at the house and was
not allowed to accompany his sister. PW-3 further deposed
that when his brother-in-law and other persons came back
from the hospital, they told him that his sister has died.
9. It has been noted by the Trial Court that this
young witness of 17 years has narrated the entire facts in
a very natural way. This fact has not gone unnoticed by us
as well as that PW-3 has given an account of events in a
very natural manner that does not seem exaggerated or
untruthful in any manner. In fact, the said witness has also
3
2025 SCC OnLine SC 952
50
been very honest about his lack of knowledge regarding
the administration of poison to his sister and has clearly
stated that he was not an eyewitness to the exact act and,
thus, has made no statement unnecessarily alleging that
the accused herself had administered such poison to the
deceased which caused her death. There is an element of
honesty and fairness in PW-3’s statement throughout
which lends it much credibility.
10. Additionally, it must be noted that on a conjoint
reading of the statements of PW-1 and PW-2 as well as the
FIR wherein PW-1 was the complainant, it becomes
apparent that the family members of the deceased have
been very precise in their allegations against the appellant.
Beginning from the point of registration of the FIR and
throughout the course of trial, it has been stated across
that it was solely the mother-in-law of the accused, i.e. the
appellant herein, who used to physically and verbally
abuse the deceased with regard to demand for dowry. The
specific demand that was made by the accused time and
again has also remained the same throughout all the
statements. It is one of the rare cases where the
complainant has displayed honesty while making the
allegations and has not unnecessarily implicated other
family members of the husband of the deceased by making
omnibus allegations against all of them, which is usually
the adopted tactic in cases of similar nature. Even the
husband of the deceased has not been roped in as a co-
accused. This reflects on the overall conduct of the
prosecution, which has been unusually fair and honest and,
in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no
reason to disbelieve the prosecution story.
11. The jurisprudence regarding the offence of
abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the IPC is
settled that the offence requires an active act or
omission which led the deceased to commit suicide,
and this act or omission must have been intended to
push the deceased into committing suicide. The facts
51
of the case make it abundantly clear that the
deceased was repeatedly tortured and abused by the
accused on account of dowry demand to the extent
that the deceased had to return to her parental
home seeking refuge. It was only on the assurance
of her parents that the deceased went back to her
matrimonial home hoping that the events would take
an upturn once her parents have returned from the
wedding and settle the matter of dowry with the
appellant-accused. However, the abuses hurled at
the deceased by the appellant on the day of the
incident, i.e. 04.05.1998, unfortunately acted as a
straw that broke the camel’s back and led her to
committing suicide. Therefore, given the factual
matrix, the guilt of the appellant under
Section 306 of the IPC has been proved beyond
reasonable doubt.”
(Emphasis supplied at each instance)
The Apex Court in the afore-quoted judgments right from
RAJEEV KOURAV to SHAKUNTLA DEVI has clearly delineated
what would amount to ingredients of abetment for it to draw the
offence under Section 306 of the IPC, which would be abetment to
suicide. The Apex Court holds that the offence requires an active
act or omission which led the deceased to commit suicide. The
narration hereinabove would clearly indicate that the acts of all the
accused put together led to a decision by the brother of the
complainant to end his life. If this would not amount to abetment,
52
goading or being proximate to the commission of suicide, this Court
fails to consider what can become a classic illustration albeit, prima
facie.
16. Insofar as the judgments relied on by the learned counsel
for the petitioners, all of those are rendered qua the facts obtaining
in those cases. It is trite law that judgments are not Euclid’s
theorem to be blindly followed. They are rendered on the facts
obtaining in each of those cases. Therefore, the law that is laid
down should be seen in the light of the facts obtaining therein and
if the facts obtaining in the case at hand are noticed, they prima
facie make out the ingredients of abetment to suicide. In that light
there is no warrant of interference in any of these cases. It is for
the accused in these cases to come out clean in a full-blown trial.
17. The petitions lacking in merit, stand rejected.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
nvj
CT:MJ
