P.M. LOKANATH AND OTHERS versus STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

P.M. LOKANATH AND OTHERS versus STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

The FIR allegations were absurd and inherently impossible given that the appellants had filed the civil suits; respondent No.2 and his relatives had a history of filing false and malicious cases against the appellants; the case squarely fell within categories 1, 3, 5 and 7 of Bhajan Lal; the initiation of proceedings was mala fide and continuation would be an abuse of process. Consequently, the chargesheet C.C. No.29027/2010, the order issuing summons and the subsequent proceedings were quashed.

Parties
Appellants: P.M. Lokanath and Others; Respondent: State of Karnataka; Respondent: Respondent No.2
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
05 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal (supreme Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Section 482 Cr PC, Section 448 IPC, Section 506 IPC, Quashing of Criminal Proceedings, Malicious Prosecution, Abuse of Process, Bhajan Lal Categories
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Civil Procedure Section 482 Cr PC Section 448 IPC Section 506 IPC Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Malicious Prosecution +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P.M. Lokanath and Others

Appellants

State of Karnataka

Respondent

Respondent No.2

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether initiation of criminal proceedings by respondent No.2 was mala fide and instituted with an ulterior motive to wreak vengeance and spite the appellants
  2. 2 Whether the allegations in the FIR are absurd and do not prima facie constitute an offence
  3. 3 Whether continuation of criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law and therefore liable to be quashed under principles in Bhajan Lal

Ratio Decidendi

The FIR allegations were absurd and inherently impossible given that the appellants had filed the civil suits; respondent No.2 and his relatives had a history of filing false and malicious cases against the appellants; the case squarely fell within categories 1, 3, 5 and 7 of Bhajan Lal; the initiation of proceedings was mala fide and continuation would be an abuse of process. Consequently, the chargesheet C.C. No.29027/2010, the order issuing summons and the subsequent proceedings were quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 14th November 2013 of the High Court of Karnataka is quashed and set aside
  • Chargesheet registered as C.C. No.29027/2010 before the IIIrd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore is quashed and set aside