IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH, DHARAWAD Dated the 20th day of April 2011 :BEFORE: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE : V.JAQANNATHAN CRIMINAL PETITiON No. 10605/ 2011 BETWEEN: Devappa, Sb Rarnappa Badiger, Aged about 20 years, 0cc: Agriculture, R/o Ganjigatti, Kalaghatagi Taluk, Dharawad District. 2. Basappa, 5/0 Manappa Badiger, Aged about 53 years. 0cc: Agriculture, R/o Ganjigatti, Kalaghatagi Taluk, Dharawad District. 3. Gurunath, Sb Manappa Badiger, Aged about 51 years, 0cc: Agriculture, RIo Ganjigatti, Kalaghatagi Taluk, Dharawad District. 4. Basavva, W/o Basappa Badiger, Aged about 45 years, 0cc: Agriculture & Household work, R/o Ganjigatti, Kalaghatagi Taluk, Dharawad District. 5. Drakshyani, D/o Basappa Badiger, Aged about 18 years, 0cc: Agriculture & Household work, Rio Ganjigatti, Kalaghatagi Taluk, Dharawad District. 2 6. Sarojavva, W/o Ramappa Badiger, Aged about 50 years, 0cc: Agriculture & Household work, R/o Ganjigatti, Kalaghatagi Taluk, Dharawad District. Petitioners (By Sri G.l.Gachinmath, Advocate.) AND: The State of Karnataka, rept. by State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Bangalore. Respondent (By Sri Anand K.Navalgimath, HCGP.) Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying to quash the entire proceedings in C.C.No. 227/2010 pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC Court, Kalaghatagi. (Crime No.82/20 10 of Kalaghatagi Police Station). This petition coming on for admission this day, the court made the following: ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader, who took notice for the respondent-State. k 3 2. In this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners pray for quashing of the entire proceedings in C.C.No. 227/2010 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) & JMFC Court, Kalaghatagi, and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that, in the complaint, there are no overt acts alleged against the petitioners and the entire family has been roped in by the compLainant and even the witnesses for the complainant are all his close relatives and on this reasoning, the learned counsel sought for quashing of the proceedings. 3. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 326, 307 and 504 read with 149 of the I.P.C. and based on the complaint allegations of one Nagappa, a case was registered and it led to the filing of the charge sheet also. 4. In the light of the aforesaid submissions put forward and in view of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that the petitioners can 4 take all the defenses before the trial court at the time of framing of the charge, in my view, this court cannot interfere under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. at this stage, and whether the overt acts alleged against the petitioners are true or not is for the trial court to examine at the time of evidence. If the petitioners still feel that they have not committed any act of assault on the complainant’s group and the offences alleged are not attracted as against them, they can very well take such a defence and can also seek for discharge. 5. With the above observations, this petition is dismissed. JUDGE ckc/