S.482 CrPC | Criminal Proceedings Can Be Quashed Based On Witness Statements Only In Rare Circumstances To Avoid Injustice: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court on Friday, while refusing to quash the proceeding initiated against former Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa charged under provisions of POCSO Act, said the quashment of proceedings relying on statements under Section 161 or under Section 164 of CrPC is only under rare and exceptional circumstances.

A single judge bench Justice M Nagaprasanna, which obliterated the cognizance order taken by Magistrate and remitted the matter back for fresh consideration said,

“Such consideration of quashment of the proceedings, relying on the statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. or under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. is only under rare and exceptional circumstances, when such statements would clearly indicate a further proceeding to become an abuse of the process of 51 the law or resulting in patent injustice. It is no law that those statements should not be looked into at all, at the time of quashment of the proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The inherent powers are wide enough to do so, but they can be exercised on a case to case basis...to prevent miscarriage of justice."

As per the complaint filed by the mother (complainant) of a 17-year-old girl, Yediyurappa sexually assaulted her daughter during a meeting in February last year, at his residence in Bengaluru. However, accoriding to the statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC,

Senior Advocate C V Nagesh appearing for Yediyurappa however referred to statements of prosecution witnesses, which apparently support his case.

Special Public Prosecutor Professor Ravivarma Kumar on the other had contended that the court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, would not quash the proceedings basing its reasons on the statements recorded by the Investigating Officer at the time of investigation, be it in favour of the accused or the complainant. It is not the stage at which this Court would consider all these facts, it was argued.

Prosecution also relied on a recorded conversation, allegedly between Yediyurappa and victim's mother tight after the alleged incident. FSL report confirms that it has Yediyurappa's voice. Thus it was argued that it is an open and shut case and it is a matter of trial for Yediyurappa to come out clean.

It is in this backdrop that the Court observed,

“There is a vivid narration of the incident by the victim about what all has happened on that day. Now the issue is statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. being pitted against the statement of the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., it is statement vs. statement. What would outweigh the other is not the stage, at which this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, would consider.”

It added, “Such consideration of quashment of the proceedings, relying on the statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. or under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. is only under rare and exceptional circumstances, when such statements would clearly indicate a further proceeding to become an abuse of the process of the law or resulting in patent injustice.”

Court clarified it is no law that those statements should not be looked into at all, at the time of quashment of the proceedings. It said the inherent powers of the high court are wide enough to do so, but it added, they can be exercised on a case to case basis, to prevent miscarriage of justice.

Then the court held, “I do not find any such threat of miscarriage of justice seen in the entire proceeding. Therefore, these matters would undoubtedly require to be thrashed out in a full-blown trial.”

Case title: BS Yediyurappa v/s The Criminal Investigating Department CID

Case No: WP 15522/2024

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 49

Click Here To Read/Download Order