Authority: High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru

Order Date: 21 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Sri J. Ramesh Kumar Jain, aged ~57, Proprietor of M/s Jineshwar Plywood and Veneers, located at No.64, 1st Main Road, Cellar Floor, Sheshadripuram, Bengaluru – 560020.
  • Respondents: (1) The State of Karnataka represented by the State Public Prosecutor, High Court Building, Annex, Bengaluru; (2) The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, LVO‑060 (Additional), No.1416/A, III Main, Adi Chunchanagiri Matta Complex, Manovana, Bengaluru – 560040.
  • Petition: Criminal Petition No. 10691 of 2026 filed under Section 482 Cr.PC (also under Section 528 B.N.S.) seeking quash of the charge‑sheet and all proceedings in C.C.No. 35173/2014 (Crime No. 67/2012 of Chandra Layout Police Station, Bengaluru) relating to offences under IPC Sections 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 34.
  • Background: The petitioner argued that a coordinate bench of this Court had already quashed proceedings against Accused No. 5 in Crl.P.No. 8041 of 2018 (order dated 23‑06‑2025). He contended that, being similarly situated, the proceedings against him should also be quashed.
  • Tax Matter Reference: The only allegation against the petitioner pertained to non‑payment of Karnataka Value Added Tax (KVAT). The relevant tax order dated 18‑05‑2019, issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit‑5.6), DGSTO‑5, Bengaluru, concerned M/s Sri Radhakrishna Alloys Pvt Ltd (TIN 29260734256, GSTSO 183, Chickaballapur). The original re‑assessment order (dated 28‑03‑2018, CAS No. 284447222.01, Demand No. 111580800.1) had levied:
  • Tax: Rs 73,69,391
  • Penalty: Rs 7,36,839
  • Interest: Rs 87,91,229
  • Total liability: Rs 1,68,97,559
  • The appellant (M/s Sri Radhakrishna Alloys) filed an appeal before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals‑5) on 17‑11‑2018 (VAT:AP:07/2018‑19, CAS No. 206757353APP). The JCCT upheld the appellant’s contentions, set aside the re‑assessment order, and directed deletion of tax, interest, and penalty, directing issuance of a revised demand.
  • The court observed that, since the KVAT allegation had attained finality through the JCCT order, there was no basis to continue the criminal proceedings against the petitioner.

Final Outcome

  • The Criminal Petition is allowed.
  • All proceedings in C.C.No. 35173 of 2014 (arising out of Crime No. 67 of 2012) pending before the I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru, are quashed as to the petitioner.
  • Consequently, Interim Application No. 1 of 2026 is also disposed.

Topics: Court Order, Criminal Procedure, Tax Litigation