- 1 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4977 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MR. ABDUL KHUDDUS B, S/O MOHAMMED BASHA K., AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, CHIEF ACCOUNT OFFICER AND FINANCIAL ADVISOR, BMTC, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027. R/O #29, 3rd MAIN 14th CROSS, NEMATH MANZIL, VINOBHANAGAR, Digitally signed DAVANGERE, by KARNATAKA - 577 006. PADMAVATHI B K Location: High …PETITIONERCourt of Karnataka (BY SRI.PARAMESHWAR N HEGDE., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY WILSON GARDEN POLICE, BENGALURU, - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 01. 2. SMT. RAMYA C.K., AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, SECURITY AND VIGILANCE OFFICER, BMTC BUILDING, B BLOCK, SHANTHINAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; SMT.H.R.RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.PC. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.22/2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE (WILSON GARDEN POLICE) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477A AND 34 OF IPC AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III A.C.M.M BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner - accused No.1 is before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.22/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477A and 34 of the IPC. 2. Heard Sri. Parameshwar N. Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and Smt. H.R. Renuka, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. 3. The petitioner was at the relevant point in time was working as Chief Accounts Officer and Financial Advisor to the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation ('the BMTC' for short). A complaint comes to be registered by the Head Office of the BMTC alleging offences as afore-quoted not against the petitioner, but several others, drawing the petitioner as accused No.1 in the array of accused. The petitioner on registration of the crime approaches this Court in the subject petition. This Court, on 28.06.2024, had granted an interim - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR order of stay, which is in subsistence even today. The matter is taken up on an application filed by the State seeking vacation of the interim order and is heard by the consent of the parties.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would take this Court through the documents appended to the petition seeking to prima facie demonstrate that the petitioner himself was the one who blew the whistle of corruption and had indicated all the persons, who had indulged in rendering a credit note in favour of the license holders. In the light of the issuance of credit note being found fault with, the petitioner communicates on 07.11.2023 with regard to the illegalities in the issuance of the credit note. The acts of the crime falls on him without any rhyme or reason is the submission of the learned counsel. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the BMTC, Smt. H. R. Renuka would however refute the submission in contending that the petitioner is accused No.1 who has signed on the credit note and the Commercial Department of BMTC has put up the papers before the petitioner for his signature. All of them are equally responsible in the episode of crime. Therefore, would - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR submit that it is a matter of investigation for the petitioner to come out clean in a full blown trial. 6. Learned HCGP would also toe the lines of the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 in contending that it is a matter of investigation at least that the petitioner has to face. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel and have perused the material on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts at this juncture lie in a narrow compass. The position of the petitioner in the BMTC is not in dispute. The fulcrum of the lis revolves around rendering a credit note to the license holders. The credit note is an amount of Rs.5,01,70,504/-. The credit note is handed over to the licensees of the shops in the complex. The petitioner senses a foul play by the Commercial Department in putting up the said document before him and immediately communicates not once, but thrice that to redeem the foul play and pass necessary orders withdrawing the said credit note. One such communication dated 07.11.2023 reads as follows: - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR ¢£ÁAPÀ:07.11.2023 ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀªÀjUÉ, ¨É.ªÀÄ.¸Á.¸ÀA¸ÉÜ, PÉÃAzÀæ PÀbÉÃj, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ. ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉà «µÀAiÀÄ: ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ... UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¹éÃPÀj¹gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ. G¯ÉèÃR: 1) n¥ÀàtÂ: ¢£ÁAPÀ:29.03.2023/381 2) ¸ÀASÉå: ¨ÉAªÀĸÁ:PÉÃPÀ:¯É¥À:376:2023-24, ¢£ÁAPÀ:12.10.2023 ªÉÄð£À G¯ÉèÃTvÀ n¥Ààt jÃvÀå ²æêÀÄw. ªÀÄAdIJæÃ, Dgï. G¥ÀªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj (¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå) gÀªÀjUÉ, ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ¥ÀæwPÀÆ® ¥ÀjuÁªÀÄ GAmÁVgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ PÀÆ®APÀµÀªÁV ¥Àj²Ã°¹ dªÁ¨ÁÝjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¹ ªÀgÀ¢ ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯ÁVvÀÄÛ. (¥Àæw ®UÀwÛ¹zÉ) ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÀÄ, n¥ÀàtÂUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ «µÀAiÀÄzÀ §UÉÎ ¥Àj²Ã°¹ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß G¯ÉèÃR 2 gÀ jÃvÀå ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÀzÀj ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß vÀªÀÄä CªÀUÁºÀ£ÉUÉ ºÁUÀÆ F PɼÀPÀAqÀ CA±ÀUÀ½UÉ ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä C£ÀĪÁUÀ®Ä ²¥sÁgÀ¹ì£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¸À°è¸À¯ÁVzÉ.

1) ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀAvÉ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É¬Ä®èzÉà Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀAiÀiÁj¹ DyðPÀ £ÀµÀÖPÉÌ PÁgÀtgÁzÀ ¸ÀAZÁgÀ (ªÁtÂdå) E¯ÁSÁ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä 2) ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀAvÉ £ÀÆå£ÀvÉUÀ½UÉ ºÉ¸Àj¸À¯ÁzÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ C¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ ¹§âA¢UÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä 3) ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀAvÉ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É E®èzÉà gÀÆ.5,01,70,504/-UÀ¼À ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß PÀrªÉÄUÉƽ¹ Credit Note ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß gÀzÀÄÝ¥Àr¹, ¸ÀzÀj ªÉÆvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ªÁtÂdå ¥ÀgÀªÁ¤UÉzÁgÀjAzÀ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁw ªÀiÁrPÉƼÀî®Ä ¸ÀAZÁgÀ (ªÁtÂdå) E¯ÁSÉUÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ." 9. The moment the petitioner blew the whistle of foul play, the acts of the crime falls on him and the impugned crime is registered. The complaint so registered by the BMTC against all the accused reads as follows: - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR ¢£ÁAPÀ:02/02/2024 UÉ, DgÀPÀëPÀ ¤jÃPÀëPÀgÀÄ «®ì£ï UÁqÀð£ï DgÀPÀëPÀ oÁuÉ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-27. ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉ, «µÀAiÀÄ:- ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀĺÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¸ÁjUÉ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼ÀÄ PÀvÀðªÀå ¯ÉÆÃ¥ÀªÉ¸ÀV ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ DyðPÀ £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAlÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃj zÀÆgÀÄ. G¯ÉèÃR:- ¸ÀA:mÉr 09 n¹J¸ï 2024 ¢£ÁAPÀ:19.01.2024 WÀ£À ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢üãÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð ¸ÁjUÉ E¯ÁSÉ, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ***********

ªÉÄîÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ G¯ÉèÃRPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ, G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ²æà C§Äݯï RÄzÀÆݸï, ªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ DyðPÀ ¸À®ºÉUÁgÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜöAiÀÄ EvÀgÉ ªÁtÂdå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ªÉÄð£À G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¸ÀÆa¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

¸ÀzÀj G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀAvÉ ªÉÄïÉÆßÃlPÉÌ PÀAqÀħAzÀAvÉ ¨ÉAªÀÄ£À¸Á¸ÀA¸ÉÜ ªÁtÂdå ªÀĽUÉUÀ¼À/eÁ»ÃgÁvÀÄUÀ½UÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ¥ÀgÀªÁ£ÀVzÁgÀjAzÀ PÀgÁgÀÄ M¥ÀàAzÀzÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ ¥Àæw ªÀiÁ» ¹éÃPÀj¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ¯Éʸɣïì ¦üà ºÁUÀÆ CzÀPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ f.J¸ï.n. ªÉÆvÀÛPÉÌ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ E£ïªÁAiÀiïìUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀgÉ, ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁZïð-2021 jAzÀ r¸ÉA§gï-2022 gÀªÀgÀUÉ MlÄÖ 456 Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀgÀªÁ¤VzÁgÀjUÉ «£Á¬Äw ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå ±ÁSɬÄAzÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉUÉ ¤ÃrzÀÄÝ, CzÀgÀ MlÄÖ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ. 20,24,10,923/- UÀ¼ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. C®èzÉà gÀÆ. 5,01,70,504/-UÀ¼À ªÉÆvÀÛzÀ 52 Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà DzÉñÀ E®èzÉà PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀªÁV ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼ÀÄ vÀAiÀiÁj¹ f.J¸ï.n. E£ïªÁAiÀiïì£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¥ÁªÀwUÁV ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉUÉ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¸À¯ÁV ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄÄ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà DzÉñÀ«®è¢zÀÝgÀÆ ¤AiÀĪÀĨÁ»gÀªÁV Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀiÁr ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß PÀrªÉÄUÉƽ¹ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ºÉÆAzÁtÂPÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ ºÁUÀÆ f.J¸ï.n. ªÉÆvÀÛ ¥ÁªÀw¸ÀĪÁUÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ¸ÀAzÁAiÀĪÁUÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÝ ¥ÀgÀªÁ£ÀV ±ÀÄ®ÌzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀj ªÉÆvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß PÀrªÉÄUÉƽ¹ ¥ÁªÀw¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. EzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄzÀ°è ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¨ÉÆPÀ̸ÀPÉÌ £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAmÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀªÁV AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà DzÉñÀ«®èzÉà ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀzÀj Credit Note UÀ½UÉ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¹§âA¢/C¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥Àj²Ã°¸ÀzÉà ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀĪÀgÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ Credit Note UÀ¼À DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÀÄK¯É ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ DzÁAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß PÀrvÀUÉƽ¹zÀÄÝ, ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄ £ÀµÀÖªÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F jÃw ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¹§âA¢UÀ¼À ºÁUÀÆ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼À£ÀÄß G®èAX¹ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÃ

- 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR ªÉÄïÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼À DzÉñÀ«®èzÉà ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ªÀAa¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ vÀªÀÄUÉ ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ jÃwAiÀÄ°è ¸ÀļÀÄî zÁR¯ÁwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀȶֹPÉÆAqÀÄ PÀqÀvÀzÀ°è C¼ÀªÀr¹ C¥ÁgÀ ªÉÆvÀÛzÀ Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤Ãr ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉUÉ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹zÀÝjAzÀ ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄ gÀÆ.11,81,43,664/-UÀ¼À £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAmÁUÀ®Ä ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼ÀÄ PÀÆqÁ PÁgÀtgÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀħA¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F jÃw GzÉÝñÀ¥ÀƪÀðPÀªÁV PÀvÀðªÀå ¯ÉÆÃ¥ÀªÉ¸ÀV ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAmÁUÀ®Ä PÁgÀtgÁVgÀĪÀ ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå ±ÁSÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉAiÀÄ J¯Áè C¢üPÁj/£ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ°è Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ¥ÀæPÀgÀt zÁR°¸À®Ä G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¤ÃrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. DzÀÝjAzÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ªÀAa¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ vÀªÀÄUÉ ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ jÃwAiÀÄ°è ¸ÀļÀÄî zÁR¯ÁwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀȶֹPÉÆAqÀÄ PÀqÀvÀzÀ°è C¼ÀªÀr¹ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ gÀÆ. 11,81,43,664/- UÀ¼À £ÀµÀÖ GAlÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ ²æà C§ÄݯïRÄzÀÆݸï, ªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ DyðPÀ C¢üPÁj/£ËPÀgÀgÀÄUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ PÉÆÃgÀ¯ÁVzÉ. ªÀAzÀ£ÀUɼÉÆA¢UÉ."

10. If the communication dated 07.11.2023 and the complaint are read in tandem, what would unmistakably emerge is that the petitioner in the hierarchy was at the end where all files being put up before him after thorough scrutiny was submitted only for the signature. The petitioner did sign the document, but immediately thereafter, communicated to the authorities that the said credit note must be withdrawn, as there was some foul play. The authorities failed to act and the crime is now registered. Learned counsel appearing for the parties would admit that it is a credit note and no benefit has been taken on the strength of the credit note by the licensees. In that light, finding the ingredients of the offence not being - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR met even to its semblance against the petitioner, permitting investigation would become an abuse of the process of the law and result in miscarriage of justice. 11. Reference being made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of STATE OF HARYANA v. BHAJAN LAL1, wherein it is held as follows: “…. …. ….

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 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we have given 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 1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in 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) of the Code. (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 concerned Act (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 - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” (Emphasis supplied) 12. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) Proceedings in Crime No.22/2024 stands quashed qua the petitioner . (iii) It is made clear that the observations made in the course of the order is only for the purpose of consideration of the case of the petitioner under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C./Section 528 of the BNS, 2023 and it would not become applicable to any other accused in the fray. (iv) The order also would not come in the way of any other proceedings initiated against the petitioner or any other accused. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2

- 1 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4977 OF 2024 BETWEEN: MR. ABDUL KHUDDUS B, S/O MOHAMMED BASHA K., AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, CHIEF ACCOUNT OFFICER AND FINANCIAL ADVISOR, BMTC, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027. R/O #29, 3rd MAIN 14th CROSS, NEMATH MANZIL, VINOBHANAGAR, Digitally signed DAVANGERE, by KARNATAKA - 577 006. PADMAVATHI B K Location: High …PETITIONERCourt of Karnataka (BY SRI.PARAMESHWAR N HEGDE., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY WILSON GARDEN POLICE, BENGALURU, - 2 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 01. 2. SMT. RAMYA C.K., AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, SECURITY AND VIGILANCE OFFICER, BMTC BUILDING, B BLOCK, SHANTHINAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1; SMT.H.R.RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P. IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.PC. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.22/2024 REGISTERED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE (WILSON GARDEN POLICE) FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477A AND 34 OF IPC AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III A.C.M.M BENGALURU. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner - accused No.1 is before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.22/2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 477A and 34 of the IPC. 2. Heard Sri. Parameshwar N. Hegde, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned HCGP appearing for respondent No.1 and Smt. H.R. Renuka, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. 3. The petitioner was at the relevant point in time was working as Chief Accounts Officer and Financial Advisor to the Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation ('the BMTC' for short). A complaint comes to be registered by the Head Office of the BMTC alleging offences as afore-quoted not against the petitioner, but several others, drawing the petitioner as accused No.1 in the array of accused. The petitioner on registration of the crime approaches this Court in the subject petition. This Court, on 28.06.2024, had granted an interim - 4 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR order of stay, which is in subsistence even today. The matter is taken up on an application filed by the State seeking vacation of the interim order and is heard by the consent of the parties.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would take this Court through the documents appended to the petition seeking to prima facie demonstrate that the petitioner himself was the one who blew the whistle of corruption and had indicated all the persons, who had indulged in rendering a credit note in favour of the license holders. In the light of the issuance of credit note being found fault with, the petitioner communicates on 07.11.2023 with regard to the illegalities in the issuance of the credit note. The acts of the crime falls on him without any rhyme or reason is the submission of the learned counsel. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the BMTC, Smt. H. R. Renuka would however refute the submission in contending that the petitioner is accused No.1 who has signed on the credit note and the Commercial Department of BMTC has put up the papers before the petitioner for his signature. All of them are equally responsible in the episode of crime. Therefore, would - 5 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR submit that it is a matter of investigation for the petitioner to come out clean in a full blown trial. 6. Learned HCGP would also toe the lines of the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 in contending that it is a matter of investigation at least that the petitioner has to face. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel and have perused the material on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts at this juncture lie in a narrow compass. The position of the petitioner in the BMTC is not in dispute. The fulcrum of the lis revolves around rendering a credit note to the license holders. The credit note is an amount of Rs.5,01,70,504/-. The credit note is handed over to the licensees of the shops in the complex. The petitioner senses a foul play by the Commercial Department in putting up the said document before him and immediately communicates not once, but thrice that to redeem the foul play and pass necessary orders withdrawing the said credit note. One such communication dated 07.11.2023 reads as follows: - 6 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR ¢£ÁAPÀ:07.11.2023 ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀåªÀ¸ÁÜ¥ÀPÀ ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀªÀjUÉ, ¨É.ªÀÄ.¸Á.¸ÀA¸ÉÜ, PÉÃAzÀæ PÀbÉÃj, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ. ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉà «µÀAiÀÄ: ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ... UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¹éÃPÀj¹gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ. G¯ÉèÃR: 1) n¥ÀàtÂ: ¢£ÁAPÀ:29.03.2023/381 2) ¸ÀASÉå: ¨ÉAªÀĸÁ:PÉÃPÀ:¯É¥À:376:2023-24, ¢£ÁAPÀ:12.10.2023 ªÉÄð£À G¯ÉèÃTvÀ n¥Ààt jÃvÀå ²æêÀÄw. ªÀÄAdIJæÃ, Dgï. G¥ÀªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj (¸ÁªÀiÁ£Àå) gÀªÀjUÉ, ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ¥ÀæwPÀÆ® ¥ÀjuÁªÀÄ GAmÁVgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ PÀÆ®APÀµÀªÁV ¥Àj²Ã°¹ dªÁ¨ÁÝjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤UÀ¢ü¥Àr¹ ªÀgÀ¢ ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯ÁVvÀÄÛ. (¥Àæw ®UÀwÛ¹zÉ) ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÀÄ, n¥ÀàtÂUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ «µÀAiÀÄzÀ §UÉÎ ¥Àj²Ã°¹ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß G¯ÉèÃR 2 gÀ jÃvÀå ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÀzÀj ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß vÀªÀÄä CªÀUÁºÀ£ÉUÉ ºÁUÀÆ F PɼÀPÀAqÀ CA±ÀUÀ½UÉ ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä C£ÀĪÁUÀ®Ä ²¥sÁgÀ¹ì£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¸À°è¸À¯ÁVzÉ.

1) ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀAvÉ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É¬Ä®èzÉà Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀAiÀiÁj¹ DyðPÀ £ÀµÀÖPÉÌ PÁgÀtgÁzÀ ¸ÀAZÁgÀ (ªÁtÂdå) E¯ÁSÁ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä 2) ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀAvÉ £ÀÆå£ÀvÉUÀ½UÉ ºÉ¸Àj¸À¯ÁzÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ C¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ ¹§âA¢UÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî®Ä 3) ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAr¹gÀĪÀAvÉ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É E®èzÉà gÀÆ.5,01,70,504/-UÀ¼À ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß PÀrªÉÄUÉƽ¹ Credit Note ¸À°è¹gÀĪÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß gÀzÀÄÝ¥Àr¹, ¸ÀzÀj ªÉÆvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ ªÁtÂdå ¥ÀgÀªÁ¤UÉzÁgÀjAzÀ ªÀ¸ÀƯÁw ªÀiÁrPÉƼÀî®Ä ¸ÀAZÁgÀ (ªÁtÂdå) E¯ÁSÉUÉ ¸ÀÆa¸À§ºÀÄzÁVzÉ." 9. The moment the petitioner blew the whistle of foul play, the acts of the crime falls on him and the impugned crime is registered. The complaint so registered by the BMTC against all the accused reads as follows: - 7 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR ¢£ÁAPÀ:02/02/2024 UÉ, DgÀPÀëPÀ ¤jÃPÀëPÀgÀÄ «®ì£ï UÁqÀð£ï DgÀPÀëPÀ oÁuÉ ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ-27. ªÀiÁ£ÀågÉ, «µÀAiÀÄ:- ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀĺÁ£ÀUÀgÀ ¸ÁjUÉ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼ÀÄ PÀvÀðªÀå ¯ÉÆÃ¥ÀªÉ¸ÀV ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ DyðPÀ £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAlÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ PÉÆÃj zÀÆgÀÄ. G¯ÉèÃR:- ¸ÀA:mÉr 09 n¹J¸ï 2024 ¢£ÁAPÀ:19.01.2024 WÀ£À ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢üãÀ PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð ¸ÁjUÉ E¯ÁSÉ, PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀ ***********

ªÉÄîÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ G¯ÉèÃRPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ, G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ²æà C§Äݯï RÄzÀÆݸï, ªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ DyðPÀ ¸À®ºÉUÁgÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜöAiÀÄ EvÀgÉ ªÁtÂdå ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ ªÉÄð£À G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¸ÀÆa¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.

¸ÀzÀj G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀAvÉ ªÉÄïÉÆßÃlPÉÌ PÀAqÀħAzÀAvÉ ¨ÉAªÀÄ£À¸Á¸ÀA¸ÉÜ ªÁtÂdå ªÀĽUÉUÀ¼À/eÁ»ÃgÁvÀÄUÀ½UÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ ¥ÀgÀªÁ£ÀVzÁgÀjAzÀ PÀgÁgÀÄ M¥ÀàAzÀzÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ ¥Àæw ªÀiÁ» ¹éÃPÀj¸À¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ¯Éʸɣïì ¦üà ºÁUÀÆ CzÀPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ f.J¸ï.n. ªÉÆvÀÛPÉÌ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ E£ïªÁAiÀiïìUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. DzÀgÉ, ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁZïð-2021 jAzÀ r¸ÉA§gï-2022 gÀªÀgÀUÉ MlÄÖ 456 Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀgÀªÁ¤VzÁgÀjUÉ «£Á¬Äw ¤ÃqÀ®Ä ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå ±ÁSɬÄAzÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉUÉ ¤ÃrzÀÄÝ, CzÀgÀ MlÄÖ ªÉÆvÀÛ gÀÆ. 20,24,10,923/- UÀ¼ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. C®èzÉà gÀÆ. 5,01,70,504/-UÀ¼À ªÉÆvÀÛzÀ 52 Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà DzÉñÀ E®èzÉà PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀªÁV ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼ÀÄ vÀAiÀiÁj¹ f.J¸ï.n. E£ïªÁAiÀiïì£ÉÆA¢UÉ ¥ÁªÀwUÁV ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉUÉ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¸À¯ÁV ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄÄ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà DzÉñÀ«®è¢zÀÝgÀÆ ¤AiÀĪÀĨÁ»gÀªÁV Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀiÁ£Àå ªÀiÁr ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß PÀrªÉÄUÉƽ¹ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ºÉÆAzÁtÂPÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ ºÁUÀÆ f.J¸ï.n. ªÉÆvÀÛ ¥ÁªÀw¸ÀĪÁUÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ¸ÀAzÁAiÀĪÁUÀ¨ÉÃPÁVzÀÝ ¥ÀgÀªÁ£ÀV ±ÀÄ®ÌzÀ°è ¸ÀzÀj ªÉÆvÀÛªÀ£ÀÄß PÀrªÉÄUÉƽ¹ ¥ÁªÀw¸À¯ÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. EzÀjAzÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄzÀ°è ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ ¨ÉÆPÀ̸ÀPÉÌ £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAmÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSɬÄAzÀ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ ¨Á»gÀªÁV AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà DzÉñÀ«®èzÉà ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀzÀj Credit Note UÀ½UÉ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¹§âA¢/C¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ¥Àj²Ã°¸ÀzÉà ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀĪÀgÀÄ ¤ÃrgÀĪÀ Credit Note UÀ¼À DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÀÄK¯É ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ DzÁAiÀĪÀ£ÀÄß PÀrvÀUÉƽ¹zÀÄÝ, ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄ £ÀµÀÖªÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F jÃw ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¹§âA¢UÀ¼À ºÁUÀÆ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÀÄ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼À£ÀÄß G®èAX¹ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÃ

- 8 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR ªÉÄïÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼À DzÉñÀ«®èzÉà ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ªÀAa¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ vÀªÀÄUÉ ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ jÃwAiÀÄ°è ¸ÀļÀÄî zÁR¯ÁwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀȶֹPÉÆAqÀÄ PÀqÀvÀzÀ°è C¼ÀªÀr¹ C¥ÁgÀ ªÉÆvÀÛzÀ Credit Note UÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤Ãr ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ E¯ÁSÉUÉ PÀ¼ÀÄ»¹zÀÝjAzÀ ªÁtÂdå DzÁAiÀÄ gÀÆ.11,81,43,664/-UÀ¼À £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAmÁUÀ®Ä ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ C¢üPÁj/¹§âA¢UÀ¼ÀÄ PÀÆqÁ PÁgÀtgÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀħA¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F jÃw GzÉÝñÀ¥ÀƪÀðPÀªÁV PÀvÀðªÀå ¯ÉÆÃ¥ÀªÉ¸ÀV ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ £ÀµÀÖªÀÅAmÁUÀ®Ä PÁgÀtgÁVgÀĪÀ ¸ÀAZÁgÀ ªÁtÂdå ±ÁSÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ±ÁSÉAiÀÄ J¯Áè C¢üPÁj/£ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸ÀA§AzsÀ¥ÀlÖ ¥Éưøï oÁuÉAiÀÄ°è Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ¥ÀæPÀgÀt zÁR°¸À®Ä G¯ÉèÃTvÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¤zÉÃð±À£À ¤ÃrgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. DzÀÝjAzÀ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ªÀAa¸ÀĪÀ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ vÀªÀÄUÉ ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ jÃwAiÀÄ°è ¸ÀļÀÄî zÁR¯ÁwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀȶֹPÉÆAqÀÄ PÀqÀvÀzÀ°è C¼ÀªÀr¹ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ gÀÆ. 11,81,43,664/- UÀ¼À £ÀµÀÖ GAlÄ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀ ²æà C§ÄݯïRÄzÀÆݸï, ªÀÄÄRå ¯ÉPÁÌ¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ DyðPÀ C¢üPÁj/£ËPÀgÀgÀÄUÀ¼À «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸ÀÆPÀÛ PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀAvÉ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ PÉÆÃgÀ¯ÁVzÉ. ªÀAzÀ£ÀUɼÉÆA¢UÉ."

10. If the communication dated 07.11.2023 and the complaint are read in tandem, what would unmistakably emerge is that the petitioner in the hierarchy was at the end where all files being put up before him after thorough scrutiny was submitted only for the signature. The petitioner did sign the document, but immediately thereafter, communicated to the authorities that the said credit note must be withdrawn, as there was some foul play. The authorities failed to act and the crime is now registered. Learned counsel appearing for the parties would admit that it is a credit note and no benefit has been taken on the strength of the credit note by the licensees. In that light, finding the ingredients of the offence not being - 9 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR met even to its semblance against the petitioner, permitting investigation would become an abuse of the process of the law and result in miscarriage of justice. 11. Reference being made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of STATE OF HARYANA v. BHAJAN LAL1, wherein it is held as follows: “…. …. ….

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 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we have given 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 1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 - 10 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in 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) of the Code. (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 concerned Act (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 - 11 - NC: 2026:KHC:35977 CRL.P No. 4977 of 2024 HC-KAR the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” (Emphasis supplied) 12. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER (i) The petition is allowed.

(ii) Proceedings in Crime No.22/2024 stands quashed qua the petitioner . (iii) It is made clear that the observations made in the course of the order is only for the purpose of consideration of the case of the petitioner under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C./Section 528 of the BNS, 2023 and it would not become applicable to any other accused in the fray. (iv) The order also would not come in the way of any other proceedings initiated against the petitioner or any other accused. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2