Prateek Tanmay
4 min readBengaluruJun 19, 2026 08:49 PM IST
The Karnataka High Court Friday refused to quash a criminal case against a woman advocate who was booked for allegedly creating a ruckus at a Bengaluru police station after her complaint regarding a road rage incident was not registered by the police.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, though, has permitted the petitioner to file an application before the trial court seeking discharge in the case.
The bench in its order said, “The petitioner shall urge all the contentions raised before this court before the concerned court. The concerned court shall answer everyone of the contentions and pass necessary order regarding discharge or otherwise. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach this court in the event the application for discharge goes against the petitioner. The concerned court shall endeavor to decide the application within 8 weeks, from the date of filing.”
During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioner admitted that her conduct was improper, but it would not amount to an offence being registered against her.
To which the bench said, “How can you be left off the hook, you tell me. If I allow your petition then I will be putting a premium on your conduct.”
The counsel for the petitioner even submitted that the woman advocate was also willing to tender an unconditional apology to the court, and the court may direct her to undertake community service while allowing the petition seeking quashing of the case.
Justice Nagaprasanna said, “Chargesheet is filed against you and bail has been granted. There is no prejudice caused to you. You cannot behave the way you have behaved.” Following this, the court closed the proceedings.
Case background
Story continues below this ad
The advocate had contended that on the intervening night of February 23-24, 2025, an auto-rickshaw overtook her car, stopped in front of it, and the auto-rickshaw driver then threw a stone, breaking her vehicle’s window glass. She later reached the Madiwala police station to report the incident, where she allegedly had to wait for about two hours. The advocate reportedly became agitated and caused a ruckus, throwing papers and other items off a desk.
Sub-inspector Padmavati, who was on night patrol, later arrived at the police station and allegedly assaulted the advocate. The incident was reportedly captured on the station’s CCTV cameras.
Though the petitioner did not register a case against the police, the department registered a case against her under Sections 121(1) (voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt to deter public servant from his duty), 132 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 351(2) (criminal intimidation) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
The advocate then moved the Karnataka High Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against her.
Story continues below this ad
Meanwhile, in April this year, the Karnataka High Court directed the Bengaluru police to register a criminal case against the woman sub-inspector.
The court had then said, “It is a fit case where the police sub-inspector who has indulged in such an act must be brought to book not by a mere warning of department inquiry but by registration of a crime and conduct of investigation.”
On June 9, the court dismissed the petition filed by the police sub-inspector to quash a case registered against her for allegedly assaulting an advocate.
The court, while dismissing the petition, imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the police officer for suppressing material facts to secure an interim stay on all further investigation from a coordinate bench of the high court earlier.
