The Karnataka High Court at Dharwad has quashed criminal proceedings against a shopkeeper accused of allegedly making remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi during a dispute over barricades placed outside his shop, holding that the complaint did not disclose the essential ingredients of the offences of causing obstruction in a public way and intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace.
The petitioner approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, corresponding to Section 528 BNSS, seeking quashing of Crime No.29/2026 registered under Sections 285 and 352 BNS. The case arose from an alleged incident on January 7, when Chinchali had placed barricades outside his shop and allegedly made remarks against the Prime Minister after being questioned about them. The petitioner argued that there was no allegation of insulting the complainant, and hence Section 352 BNS was not attracted. The State and complainant opposed the plea, contending that the allegations disclosed a prima facie case requiring investigation.
Justice Venkatesh Naik, however, found that the material on record did not contain any specific allegation that Chinchali had abused or intentionally insulted the complainant so as to provoke a breach of peace. The Court noted that the allegation essentially concerned statements allegedly made against the Prime Minister when the complainant asked Chinchali to remove the barricades.
The Court noted the four-day delay in lodging the complaint and found the allegations general and omnibus. Finding no specific allegation that Chinchali had intentionally insulted the complainant, the Court held that the offences were not made out and quashed the criminal proceedings in Crime No.29/2026. The Court held:
“
“The allegation against the petitioner is essentially that, when the complainant questioned him regarding the barricades, he made certain statements against the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India. There is no specific allegation that the petitioner abused or intentionally insulted the complainant so as to provoke a breach of peace. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature. Therefore, in the absence of the essential ingredients of the alleged offences, continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Hence, this Court is of the view that the proceedings are liable to be quashed.”
