Criminal Petition No. 563 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15006 CRL.P No. 563 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 1000 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 563 OF 2024 C/W CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1000 OF 2024 IN CRL.P No. 563/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SHRI SRINIVAS M S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/ NO 1154, 1ST CROSS 1ST MAIN, TIPPASANDRA BANGALORE 560 075.
Legal Reasoning
2. SMT. LAKSHMI SRINIVAS W/O SRINIVAS M AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/ NO 1154, 1ST CROSS 1ST MAIN THPPASANDRA BANGALORE - 560 075. Digitally signed by R HEMALATHA Location: High Court of Karnataka (BY SMT. SUMANGALA A SWAMY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE PSI TUMKUR WOMEN POLICE STATION TUMKUR SUB-DIVISION. …PETITIONERS 2. DR H S KUSUMA MEDICAL OFFICER AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS D/O SITARAM R.H, W.O PRAVEEN KUMAR SRI. SIDDESHWARA NILAYA, 6TH CROSS, 1ST STAGE, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15006 CRL.P No. 563 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 1000 of 2024 GOKUL BADAVANE TUMKUR TOWN. (BY SRI M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1, SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R2) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.447/2023 IN CR.NO.34/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C COURT TUMAKURU AND DISMISS THE COMPLAINT. IN CRL.P NO. 1000/2024 BETWEEN: SHRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O SRINIVAS M AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/NO. 1154, 1ST CROSS 1ST MAIN, TIPPASANDRA BANGLAORE - 560 075. (BY SRI. SUMANGALA A. SWAMY, ADVOCATE) ...PETITIONER AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE PSI TUMKUR WOMEN POLICE STATION TUMKUR SUB-DIVISION REPRESENTED BY STATE PP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. DR.H S KUSUMA W/O PRAVEEN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O SRI SIDDESHWAR LAYOUT 6TH CROSS,1ST STAGE, GOKULA BADAVANE TUMKUR TOWN, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15006 CRL.P No. 563 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 1000 of 2024 TUMKURU- 572 104. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M R PATIL, HCGP FOR R1, SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU , ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.447/2023 IN CR.NO.34/2023 IN TUMAKUR POLICE STATION, FOR OFFENCE P/U/S 323, 417, 498A, 504, 506 AND 34 OF IPC, ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT TUMAKURU AND DISMISS THE COMPLIANT. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. These petitions arise out of the same crime and are therefore taken up, heard, and disposed of by a common order. 2. The petitioners, who have been charge-sheeted for offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 417, 504, and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, are before this Court seeking relief. 3. The prosecution alleges that Accused No.1 is the husband of the defacto-complainant and that their marriage was solemnized on 15.10.2021. After the marriage, the defacto-complainant resided in the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15006 CRL.P No. 563 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 1000 of 2024 matrimonial home for a period of 25 to 30 days. Thereafter, she was forced to leave and started residing at her parental home in Tumakuru due to harassment allegedly caused by petitioner–Accused No.1 (husband) and Accused Nos.2 and 3 (parents-in-law). Accused No.1 is said to be insisting that the defacto-complainant consent to mutually dissolve the marriage and is refusing to take her back to the matrimonial home to lead a cordial marital life. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. A perusal of the charge sheet material indicates that the defacto-complainant resided in the matrimonial home for only 25 to 30 days. The allegations against Accused Nos.2 and 3 are omnibus and general in nature, with no specific overt act detailing how and in what manner they allegedly subjected the defacto-complainant to mental or physical cruelty or demanded money from her parental home. The allegations against Accused No.1, however, are specific, and the veracity of such allegations can be assessed during the trial; such an assessment is not appropriate at this stage of the proceedings. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15006 CRL.P No. 563 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 1000 of 2024 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others vs. State of Bihar, has held at paragraph 18 as follows: The decisions analyzing above-mentioned clearly “18. demonstrate that this Court has, on numerous occasions, expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498A IPC and the increasing tendency to implicate relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes without long-term ramifications of a trial on both the complainant and the accused. It is further evident from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations, made the course of matrimonial disputes, if left unchecked, would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this Court, through its judgments, has cautioned the courts against proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.” the in 7. Therefore, in the absence of any specific overt act attributed to Accused Nos.2 and 3, the continuation of criminal proceedings based solely on omnibus and general allegations would amount to an abuse of the process of law. The trial court cannot frame charges against Accused Nos.2 and 3 solely on the basis of such vague allegations. 8. Accordingly, I pass the following:
Decision
ORDER i. The Criminal petition No.563/2024 is allowed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15006 CRL.P No. 563 of 2024 C/W CRL.P No. 1000 of 2024 ii. The Criminal petition No.1000/2024 is dismissed. iii. The impugned proceedings in CC.No.447/2023 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge, JMFC Court, Tumakuru in so far as accused Nos.2 and 3 is hereby quashed. iv. The trial Court, to proceed against the accused No.1 in accordance with law. As against accused No.1 no observation is made in this order and observation made in this order is only in relation to accused Nos.2 and 3. v. All the contentions of the parties before the trial Court are kept open. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE AG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47