SMT. JAYA v. STATE BY JAYAPRAKASHNAGAR

#4. SMT. ARCHANA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, W/O MAHESH S. GOWDA R/O VADERAHALLI, VILLAGE, - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 …PETITIONERS KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA - 582 117. (BY SRI. HONNAPPA S., ADVOCATE) AND:

#1. STATE BY JAYAPRAKASHNAGAR POLICE STATION, BENAGALURU.

#2. SMT. SUMATHI J AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, W/O K. AJITH, R/O NO. 535/1, 6th CROSS, NEAR SOMESHWARA TEMPLE, BILEKAHALLI, VTC, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU - 560 076. (BY SMT. ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. SANTHOSHA A., ADVOCATE FOR R2) …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR, COMPLAINT AND CHARGE SHEET AND ANY OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEFS IN PROCEEDINGS HEREIN ARISING OUT OF FIR IN QUESTION, CR.NO.196/2021 (SPL.C.NO.201/2022) REGISTERED AT J.P.NAGAR P.S., FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 498A, 506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SEC.3(1)(r)(s) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT ON THE FILE OF THE HONBLE LXX ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPL.JUDGE AT BENGALURU AGAINST THE PETITIONERS BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 ORDER This criminal petition is filed by petitioner-accused Nos.2 to 5 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing charge sheet in Spl. C. No.201/2022 pending on the file of LXX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bengaluru, arising out of Crime No.196/2021 registered by J.P. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015.

#2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent-State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

#3. The case of prosecution is that on the complaint of respondent No.2, the police registered a case on 08.10.2021 against the petitioners. It is alleged that respondent No.2 came in contact with accused No.1, both were teachers in a private school and loved each other. Respondent No.2 - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 belongs to Adi Dravida Schedule Caste and accused No.1 belongs to Gowda community. Accused Nos.2 & 3 are the father-in-law and Mother-in-law of complainant- respondent-No.2 and accused Nos.4 & 5 are sisters-in-law of the Complainant-respondent No.2. Accused Nos.2 & 3 along with accused No. 1 and Complainant-respondent No.2 were living together and accused Nos. 4 & 5 were living separately in their husband's house. It is further alleged that the marriage of respondent No.2 was solemnized with accused No. 1 on 10.06.2020 in Vidyavinayaka temple in presence of elders in the family and friends. Her marriage with accused No.1 was love cum arranged marriage. Even before their marriage, complainant-respondent No.2 had informed her husband that she belonged to Adi Dravida Schedule Caste and she was not in par with his caste as he belonged to Gowda caste. As his family members consented for their marriage, she got married to him. It is further alleged that soon after the day of their marriage, the behaviour of all the family members of her matrimonial home completely changed. She was not allowed inside the kitchen and was restricted from offering prayers, and she was not allowed to sit on sofa. Her - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 sister-in-law who was residing in her in-law's house during Covid lockdown used to physically assault respondent No.2- complainant. The petitioners were harassing her stating that she was a scheduled caste woman and she should never conduct herself equally in status to them and would further state that they had arranged a girl of their own caste to her husband and that he would be married in no time and she would be killed by them. They got her married to their son only to sweep their house and to clean their bathrooms. It is also alleged that later, respondent No.2 was conceived, but she was forced her to undergo abortion. Therefore, her parents came to her matrimonial home to enquire about the said incident, but they were never let inside the house and accused Nos.2 and 3 stated that they belonged to schedule caste community and that they were dogs and dogs were not their houses. They further demanded dowry amounting to Rs.5 Lakhs, if at all they wanted to enter their house and only then, they would take proper care of respondent No.2-complainant. If not, they would ensure that she would eat her own shit. It is further alleged that her parents were not able to arrange the amount and her - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 situation turned even worse than what it was initially in her matrimonial home. On 09.01.2021, she was beat black and blue by her husband during which the door was locked by accused Nos.2 and 3 and slapped and kicked her by abusing her caste and colour. They told her to eat shit in bathroom as she is scheduled caste. Her husband criticized her stating that she was a scheduled caste woman and he did not want to lead life with her and kicked her on her stomach and sent her back home. Hence, the complaint came to be filed. The police after investigation, filed charge sheet, which is under challenge.

#4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that respondent No.2-complainant left the matrimonial home long back. Accused No.1 has filed divorce case against respondent No.2-complainant. However, on receipt of the Court notice, the present complaint has been filed after eight months of leaving the matrimonial home. There is false allegation against the petitioners. There is no demand of dowry in the complaint. It is also contended that the respondent-complainant has not stated anything about the harassment meted out by the petitioners in the dowry case. Therefore, there is delay in lodging the - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 complaint. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner No.3 and 4 said to be living separately and not in the their parents house. Hence, prayed for quashing the complaint.

#5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has seriously objected the petition and contended that all the petitioners together committed the offence. They have harassed her by taking her caste name. Hence, there is prima facie case made out against the petitioners for framing charges against them.

#6. The learned High Court Government Pleader respondent-State has seriously objected the petition and contended that the marriage between accused No.1 and the respondent No.2-complainant is love cum arranged marriage. During the marriage negotiation, there was the demand of dowry. Once again, after the marriage, the petitioners demanded dowry and Rs.5.00 lakhs has been paid. Subsequently, they demanded dowry and harassed her. Though there is delay in lodging the complaint, respondent No.2-complainant has clearly stated in the further statement about harassment meted out by the petitioners. Investigation - 8 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed. Hence, prayed for dismissing the petition.

#7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the records.

#8. On perusal of records, it is not in dispute that respondent No.2-complainant and accused No.1 belong to different castes. Respondent No.2 belongs to the category of SCST and accused No.1 belongs to Gowda community who is not the petitioner before this Court. On 04.11.2019, there was a registered marriage. Subsequently, there was arranged marriage between them on 10.06.2020, which was agreed by the members of both the family. The petitioners were said to be harassed respondent No.2-complainant taking her caste name. Respondent No.2 was not allowed inside the kitchen and was restricted from offering prayers, and she was not allowed to sit on sofa. They were assaulting her stating that she should not be given status as they belong to Gowda caste and they were said to be abused her in filthy language. She has made all these allegations made in the complaint against the accused persons. It cannot be said that accused No.1 alone committed - 9 - NC: 2024:KHC:10430 CRL.P No. 9663 of 2022 the offence but the other accused-petitioners have also joined him and committed the offence. All the petitioners are the family members. Petitioner Nos.3 and 4 though do not stay together, however, during the lock down period, they came to the maternal home and resided together. At that time, the incident took place. The witnesses have given statements and the documents have been produced by the Investigating Officer in respect of the charges which reveals that the petitioners assaulted the respondent-complainant and they were given gold articles at the time of marriage. Learned for the petitioners has produced some of the documents and photographs which do not reveal identity of any of the parties and it cannot be looked into under Section 482 of CRPC, which amounts to conducting a mini trial. Therefore, the petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, it is dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, does not survive for consideration and it is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE CS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35 CT:SK