Case Note & Summary
The High Court refused to quash two FIRs registered against the petitioner for offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) arising from a film promotion dispute. The petitioner, involved in promoting a film titled 'Cult', was accused of making abusive phone calls to a Municipal Commissioner and a political party Vice-President, and installing banners without permission. The Court found that the key offence under Section 132 of BNS (obstructing public servant) was not made out as no criminal force was used. Other alleged offences were bailable. The Court allowed the petitions under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), quashing the FIRs but directed the petitioner to tender a public apology. The judgment emphasized that FIR is not an encyclopedia
Headnote
Criminal Law-- BNSS, 2023-- Section 528-- BNS, 2023-- Sections 132, 224, 352, 353(2) and 56 -- Two quashing petitions-- Two complaints-- Crimes arised out of a solitary incident-- Dispute arose while promotion of a motion picture titled "Cult"-- Postponment of promotion programme-- Abused-- Allegations that the petitioner without obtaining any permission or approval has put up banners and spoken bad words against the sitting MLA-- Complaint registered-- Chain of events-- Complainant/municipal commissioner removed certain playcards which were obstructing vehicular movement-- Performance of duty as a public servant by complainant-- Conversation referred-- FIR is not an encyclopedia-- Case Kunwar Singh (Supra) referred-- Use of filthy language- Limited scope of interference-- No interference-- Petitions dismissed
Para-- 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: The Issue of whether the FIRs registered for offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) should be quashed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) due to lack of prima facie case and non-attraction of alleged sections
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The Court allowed the petitions, quashed the FIRs in Crime Nos. 9 of 2026 and 10 of 2026, and directed the petitioner to tender a public apology for the abusive utterances
2026 LawText (KAR) (01) 33
Criminal Petition No. 716 of 2026 c/w Criminal Petition No. 721 of 2026
Sri Vivek Reddy, Senior Advocate for Sri K.N. Subba Reddy, Advocate for Petitioner, Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, Additional Special Public Prosecutor for Respondent No. 1
State of Karnataka, Miss. Amrutha G., Sri C.N. Srinivas Gowda
Premium Content
The Indexes are only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access critical case indexes
Nature of Litigation: Criminal petitions seeking quashing of FIRs under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of FIRs registered for offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and protection from arrest
Filing Reason
Registration of Crime Nos. 9 of 2026 and 10 of 2026 alleging offences under BNS arising from film promotion dispute
Previous Decisions
No prior decisions mentioned; petitions heard and reserved on 20.01.2026
Issues
Whether the FIRs should be quashed under Section 528 of BNSS as offences under BNS are not prima facie made out
Whether the allegations attract Section 132 of BNS requiring criminal force against public servant
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner contended that offences under Section 132 of BNS not attracted as no criminal force used, other offences bailable, petitioner willing to tender public apology
Respondent argued that FIR not encyclopedia, investigation may reveal other offences like Sections 74 or 79 of BNS, investigation should continue
Ratio Decidendi
Quashing of FIR is appropriate when allegations do not prima facie constitute offences -- Section 132 of BNS requires criminal force to obstruct public servant, which was absent -- Other alleged offences were bailable -- Court can direct public apology as part of quashing order
Judgment Excerpts
The offences alleged in Crime No.9 of 2026 are all bailable offences, except the one which is Section 132 of the BNS -- Section 132 of the BNS does not get attracted in the case at hand at all, as there is no criminal force used by the petitioner to stop a public servant from performing his/her duties
FIR is not an encyclopedia -- Appropriate crime may emerge after the investigation
Procedural History
Petitions filed under Section 528 of BNSS -- Heard and reserved on 20.01.2026 -- Pronounced on 22.01.2026 -- Common accused in both petitions arising from solitary incident
Premium Content
The Indexes are only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access critical case indexes
