ORDER : 1. This petition filed under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure is by accused Nos.2 and 3, with a prayer to quash the order dated 11.04.2022 passed by the V Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Tiptur, taking cognizance against them for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 323, 305, 504, 506 r/w Section 149 IPC in S.C.No.10009/2021. 2. In support of the petition, the petitioners have contended that the order taking cognizance is arbitrary and opposed to basic tenets of criminal law and as such liable to be quashed. In Crl.P.No.6143/2021, though this Court directed the trial Court to apply judicious mind to the charge sheet material and pass appropriate orders on cognizance, the trial Court has failed to follow the same. Though in the impugned order it is stated that there is due application of mind, in fact it is a cryptic order and no reference is made to the facts. The trial Court has also not ordered for issuance of summons to the petitioners. After passing the order dated 11.04.2022, straight away posted the case for hearing on application filed by the accused persons prior to the final order dated 14.03.2022. This procedure adopted is contrary to law. 3. The petitioners and respondent No.2 belong to the same family and there is civil dispute pending between them in O.S.No.5/2020. In order to knock off the property, unnecessarily, the petitioners are implicated. When the alleged incident took place, petitioners were not at all present at the place of occurrence. It is alleged that when respondent No.2 went to the police station to file complaint in Cr.No.212/2020, he received information regarding his daughter committing suicide, but the said fact is not forthcoming in the complaint in Cr.No.212/2020. In order to attract Section 305, the prosecution has to prove that the victim was put in a such a condition that she had no option except to commit suicide. There is delay in filing the complaint and it is an afterthought and hence, the petition. 4. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for petitioners has relied upon the following decisions: (i) Randhir Singh and another Vs. State of Punjab, (2004) 13 SCC 129 (ii) Kanchan Sharma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2021) 13 SCC 806 (iii) Lateefmiyan and another Vs State of Karnataka by Bagdal Police, ILR 2007 KAR 105 (iv) M. Arjunan Vs. State of Punjab, (2004) 13 SCC 129 (ii) Kanchan Sharma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2021) 13 SCC 806 (iii) Lateefmiyan and another Vs State of Karnataka by Bagdal Police, ILR 2007 KAR 105 (iv) M. Arjunan Vs. State represented by its Inspector of Police, (2019) 3 SCC 315 (v) Anand Kumar Mohatta and another Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) Department of Home and another, (2019) 11 SCC 706 5. On the other hand learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 State would submit that complainant and accused are siblings being among 7 children of their parent. Complainant is the youngest son. According to the complainant, a partition has taken place during the lifetime of their parents. In the said partition, parents were also allotted some property with an understanding that it would go to the son who take care of them. Complainant being the youngest son took care of his parents and after their death, he is enjoying the property fallen to their share. This is the root cause for the civil dispute between the parties and in fact accused Nos.1 and 2 have filed O.S.No.5/2020, seeking share in B to E scheduled properties. In the said suit, A-scheduled properties are shown to be allotted to the share of accused No.2. They have also sought declaration that gift deed and Will executed by their father Shivalingappa in favour of complainant is not binding on the plaintiffs, etc. 5.1. They would further submit that in the light of the civil dispute pending between the parties, on 09.10.2020, at 12.00 noon accused No.1 Panchaksharaiah entered into the house and started abusing the inmates. When complainant's husband Devendraprasad questioned him, he dragged complainant holding her tuft and slapped her on the cheek. He torn her blouse by pulling the same and also pulled her saree and tried to outrage her modesty. He also snatched her gold chain. Before she could call her children, the remaining accused barged into the house and gave threat saying that the family of complainant should be ousted from the house. They also abused the children. They took away the cash and utensils from the house and destroyed the household articles. All the siblings of Devendraprasad have ganged up and acting against him and his family. They also abused the children. They took away the cash and utensils from the house and destroyed the household articles. All the siblings of Devendraprasad have ganged up and acting against him and his family. 5.2 The learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned HCGP would further submit that when Devendraprasad, complainant Vasantha and their younger daughter Bhoomika went to Turuvekere police station to file complaint, at 6.50 p.m, Devendraprasad received a telephonic call from their elder daughter Devika that, after the accused persons came to know that these people have gone to police station to file complaint, all of them entered into the house and abused Devika, her parents and sister saying that how dare her father is to file complaint against them. They also pushed her around. She managed to make a call to Devendraprasad and informed him about the incident an urged him to come early or else she would kill herself. He consoled and promised her to return at the earliest. 5.3 However, at 7.20 p.m, one Jagadish called the complainant and informed that after the accused persons left the house, he, his brother Rajashekar and Manjamma of their village observed smoke coming from his house and when they entered into the house, they found Devika dead with burn injuries in the hall. Immediately, Devendraprasad along with his wife and daughter returned home and found the dead body of Devika with burn injuries. Accordingly, Devendraprasad filed the complaint. 5.4 While the complaint in respect of morning incident was registered in Cr.No.212/2020, for the offences punishable under Sections offences punishable under Sections 149, 323, 354, 448, 504 and 506 IPC. The evening incident is registered in Cr.No.213/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 149, 323, 306, 504, 506, 448 r/w Section 149 IPC. After completing the investigation, charge sheet is filed. There is prima facie material to proceed against all the accused persons including the petitioners and juvenile offender and pray to dismiss the petition. 6. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the following decisions: i) Gauramma and another Vs. State of Karnataka and another, Crl. Pet. No. 4725/2023 dated 26.06.2023 ii)........ 7. Heard arguments and perused the record. 8. 6. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has relied upon the following decisions: i) Gauramma and another Vs. State of Karnataka and another, Crl. Pet. No. 4725/2023 dated 26.06.2023 ii)........ 7. Heard arguments and perused the record. 8. From the material placed on record, it is evident that though a partition has taken place between Shivalingappa and his children and they are enjoying their property separately, a dispute has arisen between the youngest son Devendraprasad and other siblings with regard to the properties fallen to the share of Shivalingappa. It appears, he has executed a gift deed and a Will with respect to the said properties. Civil suits are filed seeking declaration that the said documents as null and void and partition. 9. In this background, the 1 st incident dated 09.10.2020 took place at 9.30 a.m. When Devendraprasad and his wife along with their younger daughter Bhoomika went to the police station to file complaint, all the accused persons have forcibly entered into the house, when their elder daughter Devika, who was aged 17 years was alone and terrorized her. They assaulted her with hands and pulled her tuft and also abused her. They have given threat saying that when Devendraprasad would return from police station, he would be killed. Being sticken with terror, she called Devendraprasad and urged him to return immediately or else she would harm herself. When they were still in the police station, they received a call from one Jagadish saying that after the accused persons left the house, he, his brother Rajashekar and Manjamma observed smoke coming from the house and when they entered into the house, they found Devika dead with burn injuries. After Devendraprasad, his wife and their younger daughter returned, they found the dead body of Devika with burn injuries. 10. It is relevant to note that deceased Devika was the elder daughter of Devendraprasad, who is the youngest son of Shivalingappa. The accused persons are no other than her senior uncles and aunts and their children. Deceased Devika was born and brought up in their midst. While they were expected to take care of her and guard her against outsiders and it appears throughout these years, they did so, suddenly, on account of civil dispute, they became her enemies. She was a young girl aged 17 years. Deceased Devika was born and brought up in their midst. While they were expected to take care of her and guard her against outsiders and it appears throughout these years, they did so, suddenly, on account of civil dispute, they became her enemies. She was a young girl aged 17 years. She was in a shock with regard to the morning incident and was alone when her parents and sister were gone to the police station to file complaint. 11. Instead of being afraid of action that could be taken by the concerned police, embolden by the absence of other members of the family, all the accused persons including the petitioners have barged into the house and terrorized her. They have also man handled her and given threat to eliminate her father. Being overwhelmed, not being sure of her parents and sister returning home at all or at the earliest, she has chosen to take the extreme step of committing suicide in a horrific manner by burning herself. All these aspects are required to be proved at the trial. In the light of the overwhelming material placed on record, the trial Court rightly held that it is a fit case to take cognizance. 12. It is pertinent to note that as against the learned Magistrate taking cognizance, the petitioners had approached this Court in Crl.P.No.6143/2021. It was allowed and case was remanded to the trial Court to pass appropriate orders on cognizance by due application of mind. After the remand, once again, vide order dated 11.04.2022, the trial Court has taken cognizance by referring to all the evidence collected by the investigating officer. This Court finds no grounds to quash the said order. Since the accused persons were already represented by counsel, after taking cognizance the trial Court has rightly not issued summons and the same cannot be find fault with. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that in the first information report in Cr.No.212/2020, there is no reference to the second incident. It is pertinent to note that on 09.10.2020, the first incident took place at around 12.00 noon. Devendraprasad, his wife Vasantha and younger daughter Bhoomika went to the police station and filed written report. It is submitted by the learned counsel for petitioners that in the first information report in Cr.No.212/2020, there is no reference to the second incident. It is pertinent to note that on 09.10.2020, the first incident took place at around 12.00 noon. Devendraprasad, his wife Vasantha and younger daughter Bhoomika went to the police station and filed written report. On the basis of it, the concerned police registered the case at 6.30 p.m. When they were still in the police station, at 6.50 p.m, Devendraprasad received call from his elder daughter Devika about the second incident. Again at 7.20 p.m, Jagadish informed him telephonically about Devika committing suicide. Hence, question of referring to the second incident in the first report would not arise. After returning home and on finding Devika dead, Devendraprasad has given the first information based on which Cr.No.213/2020 is registered. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the decisions relied upon by the petitioners are not applicable to the case on hand. 13. Thus, all the grounds urged by the petitioners are not sustainable. In the result, the petition fails and accordingly, the following: ORDER : (i) Petition filed by the accused Nos.2 and 3 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby rejected. (ii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial court through e-mail.